Louis: Ratings and thoughts on Dirk Bogarde and Chikage Awashima/Ganjiro Nakamura (the latter wasn't ranked for Summer Clouds.)
Ratings and Thoughts on Leslie French, Richard Attenborough (The Man Upstairs and Sea Of Sand), Michel Simon, Pine and Bernardi, Trevor Howard, Gérard Séty, Tadeusz Fijewski, Myron McCormack, Eddie Albert, Lee Van Cleef, Stephen Boyd, Lino Ventura, Walter Matthau, Erich Maria Remarque & Klaus Kinski and Paul Scofield
Louis: Films To Watch (Apologies for the length, I'm currently doing deep dives of the silent era to present. Watch whatever interests you the most) Vampyr Shanghai Express The Blood Of A Poet Island Of Lost Souls Boudu Saved From Drowning The Sign Of The Cross Wooden Crosses I Was Born, But… Where Now Are The Dreams Of Youth? Broken Lullaby Emma Fanny Night At The Crossroads Two Seconds Blonde Venus L'Atlantide Red-Headed Woman The Red Head No Blood Relation Ivan Arsène Lupin Rome Express Love Me Tonight One Way Passage One Hour With You Merrily We Go To Hell Red Dust Service For Ladies Frisco Jenny Blessed Event Three On A Match Horse Feathers Murders In The Rue Morgue Rasputin And The Empress Doctor X Letty Lynton Tiger Shark Me And My Gal American Madness Back Street Smilin' Through Air Mail Dainah the Mulatto What Price Hollywood? Call Her Savage Movie Crazy Devil And The Deep Payment Deferred Hell's Highway So Big Forbidden Union Depot Downstairs Night After Night What Scoundrels Men Are! No Man Of Her Own Faithless Flesh 20,000 Years In Sing Sing Hot Saturday Thirteen Women Queen Kelly The Cabin In The Cotton The Blue Light Million Dollar Legs If I Had A Million This Is The Night The Crowd Roars Kuhle Wampe The Purchase Price The Mask Of Fu Manchu The Beast Of The City Chandu The Magician Virtue Ten Minutes To Live Kongo Skyscraper Souls Wild Girl Big City Blues The Animal Kingdom Man Wanted Blondie Of The Follies Cynara As You Desire Me Shopworn Spring Shower The Devil Is Driving The Greeks Had A Word For Them The Hatchet Man The Strange Love Of Molly Louvain Night World The Age Of Consent The Penguin Pool Murder Three Wise Girls The Half-Naked Truth The Bartered Bride I By Day, You By Night Law And Order Lady And Gent Central Park The Man Who Played God Madame Racketeer The Music Box Helpmates County Hospital Towed In A Hole Their First Mistake The Chimp Any Old Port! Scram! The Dentist The Cradles
Ok. South Pacific was not good. It's saving graces are the score and some of the numbers. The rest of it is pretty painfully dull, if not pretty poor. At least it's pretty when the filters aren't used. 2.5s and 3s for most of the cast members, if not lower in John Kerr's case.
Louis: I'm with you on Ted and Rebecca. What kept me from being more on-board, though, is that Waddingham and Sudeikis had good platonic chemistry but basically zero romantic chemistry.
I should've specified - I was referring to just the conversation between Ted and Rebecca in particular, because that's where the show seemed to nearly go out of its way to set up *everything* needed for the couple to happen at that moment, only to change its mind anyway. Even as someone who wasn't a big "shipper" of the two I can understand why some viewers were frustrated. Could I get your thoughts on that specific scene, if you haven't given them elsewhere?
Louis: Michel Simon in Boudu Saved From Drowning and Charles Laughton in Island Of Lost Souls & The Sign Of The Cross are performances that should be considered for write-ups.
Found Rustin to fall hard into the "it's fine...I guess" category of biopics. There are some more inspired moments/ideas in terms of the infighting within the civil rights movement involving the participation of the titular character and getting over the biases of those in the system with him. But for every inspired moment there's at least five extremely standard biopic moments. All filtered through George C. Wolfe's direction that falls hard into a workman's "generalized prestige" playbook, that limits what is in the film. Not a bad film, but seems like a far greater film could've been made named Rustin.
Rock - 2 Turman - 3 Ameen - 3 Pounder - 3 Potts - 3 Wright - 3(Even if he seemed like he was still in a Wes Anderson movie) McDonald - 3 Harper - 2.5 Ramey - 3
Edward G. Robinson, Two Seconds Michel Simon, Boudu Saved from Drowning Charles Laughton, Island of Lost Souls Fredric March, Merrily We Go to Hell Lee Tracy, Blessed Event
Walter Huston, American Madness Raimu, Fanny James Cagney, Winner Take All Lionel Barrymore, Rasputin and the Empress John Gilbert, Downstairs Maurice Chevalier, One Hour with You James Cagney, Taxi! Clark Gable, Red Dust Fernandel, He Spencer Tracy, Me and My Girl Eward G. Robinson, Tiger Shark
Supp Lowell Sherman, What Price Hollywood? Lionel Barrymore, The Broken Lullaby Tatsuo Saitô, I Was Born, But... Harry Baur, Poil de Carotte Boris Karloff, Night World Charles Laughton, Sign of the Cross
Sadly The Killer may have been a mere exception in the Fassbender curse, where once reliable filmmakers deliver one of their worst films after casting him. As while this is better than Love & Thunder, it's not very good. Taika Waititi has become self aware, after achieving mainstream success and become largely unfunny and nearly intolerable onscreen, which is once again the case here but thankfully his screentime is limited. But 75 percent of the gags sink like an anvil, 20 percent could work but are ruined by bad timing with the editing and direction. That leaves only few chuckles left. The feel good underdog story, has potential but that is only vaguely realized in a few moments. The skeletons of the arcs are there but the meat is missing. Key moments either are rushed through or appear missing. Fassbender does what he can, particularly in a locker room speech, but largely he's saddled selling weak material.
I’d go lower for Fassbender in Next Goal Wins actually, I think for most of the film he should have taken a lighter approach, which I actually think would have made that last locker room speech more affecting.
French - 4(A performance that honestly has much built up to as the target of our trained army assassin. French though comes in quite unassuming enough as just a fairly charming though modest middle aged man. He has a kindness, even if like our protagonist, you want to be immediately suspicious of his kindness. French though grants much detail to the character in bringing a natural warmth about him with his family and you struggle yourself with the idea of if you could really kill this man. Then his final scene is absolutely brutal, French's performance is heartbreaking just through the visceral detail of it, and just making it a truly painful moment to watch.)
Attenborough - 4(All that intensity but not enough places to go with it. Attenborough is selling much in the character just being on the extreme edge, and is wholly convincing as a man who is falling apart. He has a force about him that is potent in itself, sadly the film doesn't really aid him by providing him anything interesting to do other than be upset in a generalized way.)
Simon - 4(A moving portrayal of the man setup by the public to be the killer. Simon portrays the petrifying fear powerful in being lost in such an honest way, yet with this simple sort of manner about him that makes him passive as something others can accuse of him. Simon's performance is filled with such desperation consistently and presents such a terrible tragedy of the man who finds himself truly as the wrong person at the wrong time. Giving complete humanity to this character and the unfortunate treatment of him.)
Pine & Bernardi - 4(Both I think are terrific in setting up what was not as common of a type at all of the more sarcastic type henchmen, both with their own personalities, even if tied to the professional hitman, both scared yet undercutting in their own ways. Pine brings this foolish pompousness of a man who thinks there's nothing to kill yet the weakness in every delivery paints him the fool, and Bernardi as just the man scared of the whole thing and just stuck on following the easiest route.)
Howard - 4(The most interesting character in the piece, where Howard is quite effective in presenting this state of mania, of a man just emphasizing joy, because of the fear deep within him as he faces his potential death. Howard creates this sense of anxiety beautifully by always undercutting it with the man's jovial manner, while also undercutting that by showing the man is just barely holding himself together. Unfortunately the film drops him just as his character is getting the most interesting.)
Sety - 4(Wonderful depiction of sheer exasperation of the art dealer genuinely trying to help his friend, yet neither his friend nor his clients ever do him favors. Sety though brings a wonderful sense of this comedic quality to the man's efforts, particularly in the American client scene, where in his face he's hilarious if also moving in showing the unease of the man towards the artist being the artist, while trying to smooth over every point.)
McCormack - (As the original exasperated Sergeant at his less than intelligent recruits, McCormack has wonderful comedic timing throughout, in portraying consistently the sergeant just wanting to get back to his normal routine, but being thrown off from it every time. Creating the right sense of comic anxiety as every attempt is thwarted and is an ideal foil to Griffith throughout.)
Albert - (Brings sort of that kind Albert personality in many scenes and I do like the warmth he brings in projecting the man trying to grant understanding as a superior. However his best scene is being the most intense interrogator, where Albert is wholly convincing as he puts his man through the ringer. Bringing a dynamic intensity that reveals the severity of the situation quite bluntly.)
Cleef - 3.5(Mostly Van Cleef just being evil as the henchmen he often was, however he's genuinely moving in the scene where Peck has him dead to the right, where his pleas for mercy feel absolutely honest and manages to make a disposable henchmen more than that.)
Boyd - 3.5(Quite the effective pompous sleaze ball turn that is consistently horrible as he is, though I do like his scene with Peck as well where his reactions are very specific as a man who is genuinely thinking "I've done plenty of crimes like that but not that one".)
Ventura - 3.5(Every reaction of his is great in his nefarious evil manner, where he's basically this human vulture as he longingly watches for death with a calm sadism.)
Matthau - 3.5(Enjoyable sleazebag turn from him, just plays it up and is genuinely menacing as well. It is always interesting to see that his baseline became comedic, because he could be genuinely intense as he is here and in Fail Safe.)
Remarque - 3.5(Wouldn't have imagined this was stunt casting, just a good character actor, as he immediately brings an emotive sense of gravity to his scenes, creating a real sense of the devastation of all of Germany in his calm yet potent emotional sense of delivery.)
Kinski - 3.5(I mean need an extremely sinister and sadistic soldier at a moment's notice, look no further. Makes a quick but quite effective impression in presenting the ease of the character's calm when informing someone of the worst possible news.)
Justice - 3.5(Quick but effective bit in bringing this jovial quality to the task of killing.)
Hamilton - 3.5(Always fun in playing the pompous jerk, and this is not different. Enjoyable though more for some great moments of comedic timing.)
David - 3.5(Diabolical sleaze. One note, but effectively that note.)
Nielsen - 3.5(Always funny that he became fully comic, because he actually was convincing as an actor, here in just being a right old pompous jerk with the right disregarding energy.)
Ryu - 3.5(I mean bring his natural quality as usual, and much is just the quiet way of the character announcing his own reservations with his daughter's choices, but has his main scene of the prayer which he delivers in his typically wonderfully modest way.)
Moore - 3.5(Not sure the point of his character, but there's a real gravitas in his performance, where he implies some meaning even when none can be found.)
Attenborough - 3.5(Has a bit more presence just because he's Attenborough.)
Stanton - 3.5(Fun to see him in such an early role, though he's also fun in his performance in just playing up the sloppy sleaze of the character and just being a wretched sort properly.)
Desailly - 3.5(Brings enough low key menace along with the right ambiguous note that builds towards his final explosion which is effective. Though an example of where I wish the film had dived deeper.)
Scofield - 3.5(Purely based on being Scofield, as this is an extremely standard character but he makes an impact through sheer will or just perhaps talent.)
Jagger - 3.5(Fine sleazy landowner turn.)
Thomas & Sellers - 3.5(Both playing it up effectively in just being grotesque plotters, with a nice comedic timing even if perhaps I wanted even more from them.)
Thatcher - 3.5(Brings a nice pompous evil presence, simple but it works bringing enough gravitas to the proceedings.)
Morrow - 3.5(More or less a reprise of Blackboard, but effective again as younger sleaze.)
Wynn - 3.5(His character is a weird aspect of the film, that doesn't work as well but I did like the warmer presence he brought regardless.)
1. Jean Simmons - Home Before Dark 2. Kinuyo Tanaka - The Ballad of Narayama 3. Chikage Awashima - Summer Clouds - 5 4. Elizabeth Taylor - Cat on a Hot Tin Roof 5. Kim Novak - Vertigo 6. Ingrid Bergman - The inn of the Sixth Happiness 7. Ingrid Thulin - The Brink of Life 8. Eva Dahlbeck - The Brink of Life 9. Bibi Andersson - The Brink of Life 10. Jeanne Moreau - Elevator to the Gallows
Supporting Actress:
1. Lili Palmer - The Lovers of Montparnasse 2. Sylvia Syms - Ice Cold in Alex 2. Kay Walsh - The Horse's Mouth 3. Fujiko Yamamoto - Equinox Flower 4. Irene Worth - Orders to Kill 5. Marlene Dietrich - Touch of Evil 6. Izumi Ashikawa - The Perfect Game 7. Olivia De Havilland - The Proud Rebel 8. Annie Girardot - Maigret Set a Trap 9. Hideko Takamine - The Rickshaw Man 10. Ingrid Thulin - The Magician
Luke:
Bogarde - (His performance brings a consistent life to the proceedings by adding so much charisma to his Carton. He just leaps off the screen every time he shows up and absolutely dominates. Dominates in part in just being the attorney who commands with such ease. He's captivating though in playing up the slightly roguish, cynical and self-loathing qualities with such dynamic ease once again. He makes you immediately like and engage with his Carton. Then though when the film gets more serious with him, he absolutely sells the moments of earnestness. Whether that be his sloppy declaration of love or his final decision, Bogart brings a real sense of gravity in every reaction and every moment. His performance is convincing that this is a great adaptation even though it is not.)
Nakamura - 4(Brings just the right haggard energy to his performance that provides a certain balance and natural chemistry with his co-star. They create the right sense of this mutual point of sort of not quite agreeing with how things are yet trying to find some understanding through their discussions. He brings a great blunt exasperation to it all, while also showing in his eyes this sense of the man not ignoring it but rather taking it in as much as he can even though he does not exactly love these turns of events.)
Awashima - (Just completely dynamic in her performance that brings such a command while doing so in a way in which she is technically fulfilling what is seen as the submissive role in her society. Her performance never is as such though as she exudes a natural intelligence and really this sense of reality in her work. There is so much nuance in the scenes of talking about the next generation where she brings this Emmaesque to calculation of how things should work, but also the sense of her own emotional analysis of sensing how the new have to deal with things very differently from her. She's wonderful though in showing the different sides per the situation. In moments being absolutely dominant in her manner as the woman who knows the world better than anyone, but also in the scene with the reporter, which weren't my favorites in the film, however her portrayal of the hidden want for something more feels absolutely real and tangible even if the relationship itself wasn't all that interesting.)
Russell - 4(It’s all her personality just up to the most extreme degree, and she’s there to really sell everything the film is doing. Frankly though I think it does get repetitive even though Russell is trying to sell of it, I even got a little tired of the sell. I did enjoy her quite a bit in certain moments of showing when Mame is more out of her element in particular where her great comedic energy really worked, but the scenes of her being just the wacky Aunt who is rich were less interesting to me.)
Palmer & Schneider - 4.5/4(The former I think steals the show overall because I think she finds just the right ambiguity in her performance. In that she has this modest charisma of the woman who inspires but does so gently. Though in the moments of forwardness by the student, she doesn’t portray it one way specifically yet manages to play the vague note in a way that doesn’t feel vague, creating the right complication by successfully not leaning towards an exact meaning. Schneider’s also good, though is better elsewhere, though in just being this ball of shy desperation, that switches to more overt desperation. But what’s consistent is the outward power of her onscreen presence.)
Tony:
Well I would agree with that regarding their chemistry. That scene in particular is well acted by both, and I would say they play it with a certain ambiguity with how far their love goes, and I would say the love part is a given even if not romantic. Frankly that moment though between them is the most interesting thing Rebecca had that season.
Luke:
Rock - (I mean, he’s just not that good of an actor, he is unable to really act in silent moments, he makes sitting look unnatural in his way. Here though he’s supposed to have gravitas, he has none, he’s supposed to have an emotional change, I couldn’t tell a difference because of how much everything in his work is off the immediate surface. He could’ve been worse I guess but he’s just lifeless overall.)
Harper & Ramey - (Both are designed to be overshadowed, however I will say Ramey brought a bit more in terms of not being overshadowed as much, however still was.)
Everyone else - (All good just with really quick bits even when in multiple scenes, most are built on innate presence though and have very limited characterizations to work with.)
Fassbender - (Well on Michael’s point, I think a problem with the film is it doesn’t set up its comedic chemistry properly, which Waititi I think wants the locals to be comedic light against the intensity of Fassbender, which he does bring, but just how it is all done isn’t properly realized by the film. I don’t blame him because I think he is selling the harsh dejected coach routine well enough, he’s just working with lines that aren’t very good and setups that don’t work. When really all comedic contrasts are dropped and he’s just being dramatic though, he’s at his best, and Fassbender does bring a real honesty to his locker room speech, even if the film doesn’t properly build to the scene, Fassbender delivers it well.)
Kightley - (I went from liking his singular performance to disliking from scene to scene. Again speaks to Waititi not having it down, because he doesn’t seem sure if his character wants to be just funny or more. Therefore he’s occasionally funny, but sometimes not, and often undercuts supposed drama.)
Kaimana - (The closest to a complete arc, however the character’s low key is handled so quickly, particularly the like 3 second scene of looking at pills that is just like, really that’s all you gave it? Still has a fairly strong presence and I think is helped by Waitit treating the character in almost an entirely dramatic way. Kaimana’s performance does work as such, even if again I think there was a greater power possible here, fumbled by the writing and direction.)
Fane - (Really missing way too many scenes in terms of establishing key relationships, as every one of his is vague, he’s fine but there should’ve been more to this character.)
House - (Her bits didn’t work for me here, but at least she didn’t annoy me.)
Arnett - (Eh, he’s in it I guess.)
Moss - (Eh, she’s in it I guess.)
Darby - (Have historically loved him, but he’s used horribly by being way too broad, with his whole bit being like “what the hell are you doing Waititi?” As he’s complete parody while the rest of the film is not. Darby though also I didn’t think was really selling it well either, falling into just being wacky in a way that did not work.)
Waititi - (Never have I had a bigger turnaround I think, as I can’t stand him onscreen now, and honestly off-screen, I went from loving his interviews to finding him unbearable, and I typically don’t make it personal, however I’ve never seen someone seemingly so altered by fame. As everything about his performance here continues as a man who can do no wrong but he can do plenty. I mean “LOOK I GOT FAKE TEETH” why is this funny, it’s not. I’m doing Korg but now as a priest. Still not funny, just nails on the chalkboard.)
Safe to say the trailer itself took several turns I did not expect, including the Clive Owen appearance, as it goes from seeming a small interpersonal thing, to The Menu and the Shining mixed together. Perhaps I'll check it out given it has already aired a couple episodes.
Was not surprised to see Barry Jenkins in the credits in the style the film evokes, and certainly a series of fairly captivating images, though obviously more than a little obtuse in terms of the trailer.
Louis: Thoughts on Theodore Bikel in I Want to Live!, Georges Poujouly in Elevator to the Gallows, Harry Guardino in Houseboat and Audie Murphy in The Quiet American.
Louis: What is your rating and thoughts on Zach Galligan in Gremlins? I saw it for the first time recently and I was baffled to how the dog had better reaction shots.
What confounds me about Last Goal Wins is that the “underdog-sports-story” subgenre is one where you’d actively have to try to screw up. The story/arc is already there; one just has to fill in the blanks. Yet…here we are.
Everyone: Has anyone here seen "Jujutsu Kaisen"? I'm debating whether or not to watch the series myself, since there's a decent amount of episodes, but it also seems very liked.
And if you have seen it, thoughts on this? It also relates to "Chainsaw Man" which I recently finished...and have many complex thoughts on.
Mitchell: I've seen most of the first season of Jujutsu Kaisen, and I'd definitely recommend it. Doesn't exactly reinvent any wheels of the genre, but a very good modern Shonen nonetheless.
RatedRStar: Those filters in the numbers were so baffling. I'm trying to catch up on Rodgers and Hammerstein, and I am already regretting it. Here's my ranking so far
1. The Sound of Music (5): No note. An absolute favorite. 2. The King and I (4): Has notable issues, but is incredibly well done in spite of that. Also Deborah Kerr is wonderful. 3. State Fair (4): Just a wholesome good time. Not much to complain about. Just lacks a truly great performance to give it second place 4. Flower Drum Song (3): Song numbers are nice, productions values are strong,l and the performances are good, especially Nancy Kwan's but the story isn't the best. 5.South Pacific (2): Apparently, the stage version was lauded? Just about nothing truly works, but there are some wonderful songs. But songs alone can't save this.
Bikel - (Very similar to his Oscar nominated role as just portraying the decent guy being decent, here just delivering some general exposition before a pretty quick exit. I think he's fine in this note but it isn't anything too notable either.)
Poujouly - (Found his romantic/hoodlum type fairly forgettable as the type goes. Not terrible or anything but not terribly memorable either.)
Guardino - (Yeah have no idea why he got that Globe nod, as he's really just pretty forgettable in general. He's not bad but doesn't have great chemistry or comedic timing. He's just kind of there.)
Murphy - (There are moments where his face seems to fall into some emotional state, that has nothing to do with the scene at hand I do wonder if it had something to do with the PTSD he unfortunately was likely suffering from. The rest of the time, he's very stiff, and given his character merely in this version is just this great American, I guess there technically shouldn't be any hidden layers. Regardless, he's just not a dynamic screen presence.)
Robert:
2 - (And that's going by having seen the film last like 25 years ago. I think it does speak to the strength of Michael J. Fox, whereas the young man in an incredible situation is such a dynamic performer. But speaking back to the forgettable Galligan, all I really remember is always having the same sort of blank expression throughout the film, and not really creating any reality in the horror of the gremlins nor a comedic sense in reacting to it. Just a bland performance all around honestly.)
Tahmeed:
Encouraging me to give Olivier the win back? Just kidding.
Seriously though amazing scene in that it wholly convinces you that Wyke is going to kill Tindle, and you seem to have it out in all details. With Olivier pouring all his menace and disgust into every line and bringing this vile sense of superiority suddenly in his speech of Tindle "not being him". You seemingly see just how much hatred Wyke has on a fundamental level, with the affair but also as a class divide connected to a certain pathos when noting his wife loved him at some point. Caine though is also great in not playing it with any usual dignity of the condemned man rather bringing just the worst kind of sorrow of someone who thinks he's about to die in such seemingly ridiculous circumstances.
Bryan:
That would've been a much better choice.
Tony:
Doomed romance: Vertigo, Elevator to the Gallows, Ashes and Diamonds, Lovers of Montparnasse 19, Rickshaw Man, Madchen in Uniform, The Fly, King Creole
Subterfuge: Vertigo, Touch of Evil, The Hidden Fortress, Murder by Contract, Orders To Kill, Ivan the Terrible Part 2, The Magician, The Bravados, Teacher's Pet, Man of the West, Elevator to the Gallows, The Lineup, Home Before Dark, Ice Cold in Alex, The Horse's Mouth
Shaggy:
#4
Robert:
Hmm, I think if I've seen it usually I'm not nearly as surprised one way or the other, for example I might've said you'd hate the Holdovers, before I saw it, but when I saw it, I instantly thought those who hate Payne will probably at least like this one.
I suppose though Asteroid City, as I suppose I'm baffled by any and all love for it, but that's just me on that one. And also maybe First Man.
Marcus:
Well I will need a clarification, as in the best teachers, or for the quality of the performance? For example Michael Redgrave gives one of the very best performances as a teacher, but Crocker-Harris is a bad teacher.
Louis: Your thoughts on WKW's direction and the cinematography of Ashes of Time? I don't remember seeing them.
Always been a fan of the movie but it's hard to justify why. The story is clearer once you read summations of it online, but the editing borders self parody at times.
I'm a bit lower on Memory it seems than most, in part I didn't love the insistence of the austerity of the directorial choices, and I feel one moment early on involving the start of the central relationship feels like a shocking moment for the sake of it. And while it is perhaps to give credence to a perception of Chastain's character, we never see her act actively paranoid the rest of the film, and her other accusations prove to 100% true, so it's an inclusion I don't think really felt earned by the rest of the narrative or the character. Having said that, the relationship between the woman troubled by her memories, and the man losing his memories, does work, and is well realized. Working both in terms of the mutual sadness but also the mutual affection found between the two. However I do think the other character's reaction to it feels pretty standard if not even cliched at times. Many elements, such as Sarsgaard's daughter feel completely forgotten about, Chastain being overprotective towards her daughter, aren't really resolved, nor do I think the film quite earns a "well life doesn't always resolve itself". The relationship is enough to carry the film however.
Louis: do you go Lead or Supporting for Sarsgaard? And glad to see a 4 for Harper, it was nice to see her get a bigger part and thought she did great with it.
Melissa Berrara has been fired from Scream 7 because she tweeted a pro palestine tweet , like...that has surely killed the franchise right there, what on earth?
The former I think is a solid showing of Hackman's steely, forceful screen presence (also intense work from Rooker and Douriff).
The latter scene might be hard to judge fully due to the editing. That said, I've always found Laurie's "devil may care" style as House amusing - though it would 100% NOT FLY in an actual hospital setting.
RatedRStar: I was checked out of the franchise long before the current conflict (I know "Scream 6" has it's fans...I just couldn't bring myself to watch it).
Mitchell: Its not necessarily to do with the Scream franchise itself, even though Scream 5 and especially acting wise 6 were actually fine films compared to other franchises that have gone on this long and outstayed their welcome,
Its the fact you could make a pro palestine tweet, which does not make you a Hamas terrorism supporter and get fired for it, it makes you a human rights and ceasefire supporter, thats what its supposed to be anyway.
Louis: I've been looking over my lists and have wondered whether any of these performances could still get upgraded:
Monty Woolley in The Pied Piper Topol in The Fiddler On The Roof Terence Stamp in The Limey Liev Schreiber in Defiance Bradley Cooper in The Place Beyond The Pines
Those that you've definitely settled on, I would like to take off the list.
I liked Napoleon, however I don't think achieves greatness. The battle scenes are marvellous spectacle, and the general aesthetic is most eye-catching, both things one typically doesn't worry about with Ridley Scott. It's the story that can be the problem, and from this cut at the very least, it rushes through the political career of Napoleon to get to the key moments of military career, leaving little overall context and weakening one's investment. Countering that though is the relationship between him and Josephine, which is quite surprising, but I certainly found it more than a little intriguing its atypical nature. But while I wouldn't call the overall a film a mess, its various parts are put together with very thin strands that make the whole thing stay together, but only just enough. But I did like the overall approach more or less, so I guess bring on the four hour cut, and hopefully the proper cut.
Kirby - 4.5 Rahim - 3 Miles - 3 Needham - 3 Philipponnat - 2.5 Rhys - 3 Everett - 3.5 Mawn - 3
The supporting cast definitely all suffer from the pace, as many just vanish without a word.
Louis: In terms of historical scope, how much of Napoleon's life is it covering?
From the trailer, I would surmise it mainly focusses on his miltary career (french revolution - just before Russian invasion), but does it also include physically show his life before/after?
His exile on St. Helena could be an intriguing film by itself; A denounced world leader, forced to spend his remaining days in a semi-prison, regailing visitors with his past exploits while still a bitter egomaniac within - there's cinematic potential in that.
I am actually somewhat surprised by the Napoleon reviews, I wasn't expecting it to get solid reviews, I thought it would get very divisive reviews lol, like a Kingdom of Heaven reception lol.
Matt Mustin: 2005 is probably IMO the worst year in Oscar history, Good Night, and Good Luck is one of the only good films to be fair, including recent events lol.
Note: You have to see them in the teaching setting at some point.
Bryan Cranston - Breaking Bad Michael Redgrave - The Browning Version Maggie Smith - The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie Mads Mikkelsen - The Hunt Christopher Walken - The Dead Zone Anne Bancroft - The Miracle Worker Mads Mikkelsen - Another Round Joanne Woodward - Rachel Rachel Michael Stuhlbarg - A Serious Man Harrison Ford - Raiders of the Lost Ark/Last Crusade
8000's:
The precision of Ozu both pre/post, isn't too surprising given how both specific and precise his films are. As it is hard not to sense that in his films, which have such an exact approach every time. And hearing his approach of using images isn't surprising, as his films are often defined by a key image, and you can easily see how perhaps he worked off of that to then develop his film.
Tony:
Are you Being Served I recall being quite a funny episode for focusing on the neuroticism of the brothers as attached to their mother's note, with the final twist being perfection particularly in the hilarious revelation of it.
Ask Me No Questions, I mainly recall for the fake Maris moment, otherwise the episode was one that was just kind of "fine" as recall.
Door Jam for me is a late great episode, where it remembered to properly pair Frasier and Niles in a completely hilarious situation. This time just in the fixation of the spa, with the finale being one of my favorite moments especially Frasier's "please remain in the relaxation grotto, have crueler words ever been spoken" and of course "YES This is where we belong" as they enter the back alley with bees.
Anonymous:
Well by virtue of the last scene which is one of the best acted scenes, period, Yamazaki, though Mifune is also amazing in that scene.
Chastain - (Her initial work is quite effective in showing this sort of passive detached state of the character, who just interacts with just enough to get by. Chastain presents her as constantly having this shield about her, in her body language having barely any interaction with others, and even those she does interact with in a very modest, barely outgoing manner. The only minor break with that is with her daughter, however even that Chastain portrays effectively as a warmth that is very guarded, not towards her daughter rather the notion of her becoming associated with others. Her first major scene with Sarsgaard, again I don't think is consistent to overall character written as it is more intense paranoia that we don't see through the rest of the film. She's very effective in the scene however in bringing suddenly and quite bluntly the more vicious trauma the character has gone through. Afterwards Chastain is terrific though in her scenes with Sarsgaard which is a combination of empathy along with giving comfort and taking comfort. There's a real natural quality in their interactions that makes their scenes work together wonderfully well. Though I'll get into this more likely later. Otherwise she has her big scene with Harper, where she brings again the intensity of her outrage and just dissatisfaction powerfully, and again as this fundamental pain within the anger.
Harper - (A well done bit of horribleness by her. Because she successfully puts on the most immediate facade of mothering in the easiest way possible. In terms of being the "loving" grandmother she convincingly puts on the front, even if she has some great moments of cracks where when she does something wrong these is always this narcissistic quality in her performance where she defers blame with the biggest smile on her face and a whole manipulative manner to her work. She's then terrific though in her scene of her full performance in so convincingly portraying every denial and shift towards a bitter insidious blame. I especially loved her final delivery of what was the last denial, as this manner of her being absolutely fixed in her delusion of her perfection against the evidence to the contrary.)
Wever - (As the more put together sister, she gives a decent understated performance where she manages to convey the sense of concern for her sister though combined with a degree of frustration for her state. I don't exactly love what's done with the character towards the end writing wise, particularly the last scene between her and Timber which felt half-conceived however I find Wever's performance delivers well enough.)
Fisher & Timber - (Both I think were underwritten within the scheme of the film, particularly the former where the film just seemed to forget the character existed. I don't think either really created that much of a sense of history with their parental co-stars, and was a weaker aspect of the film to me.)
Calvin:
He felt lead to me, as there's plenty from his perspective and the film does very much feel like the story of both characters, even if Chastain is favored overall.
8000's:
I'm done with 58 viewings for the time being.
Luke:
Well it is about time, may Rylance get that Emmy this time. Although I really hope they recast Richard Rich.
RatedRStar: I always found it frustrating how Clooney won for a very forgetable performance, despite genuinely proving his talents that same year as a film maker and performer. Though to be fair, the whole direction of "Syriana" seemed to take a hands-off approach (IE lets just film this person - they'll do the rest).
A compelling scene, I'll admit I never sought out the show because pretty much everyone said it derailed. And I'll say Malek seems at his most natural here, though one could argue that maybe he just always seems a bit stiff and awkward on screen, however that completely fits this character. Though one can wonder a chicken and the egg situation, is Malek great in this scene, or do all his weaknesses become strengths with this character?
RatedRStar:
Also you get the rare glimpse of George Clooney being a great director...shame that was a fluke apparently.
Luke:
Well I should probably move Topol to a 4.5. No on Woolley. Probably not on Schreiber and Stamp.
Mitchell:
From the start of his rise to power during the Revolution to his end in exile. Many key moments though are just a quick scene honestly.
Louis: Having seen the first two seasons of Mr. Robot (and having little interest in watching the rest of it), Malek is perfect for that role. He's consistently great even when the show is far from it, and I'd recommend at least watching the first season if you have time for it.
Louis: Could Naomi Watts go up to a 5 for King Kong or at least go up a few places in the 2005 Lead Actress ranking. I was rather surprised you ranked her below Huffman and Theron.
Louis: I understand if you don't want to talk about this, but your thoughts on Susan Sarandon getting dropped by her talent agency and Melissa Barrera being dropped by the Scream franchise?
Anonymous: I have very strong feelings on that, as I imagine most people do, so not entirely sure if this is the best place for that conversation.
Setting aside the actual content of what they were saying, the consequences they faced are sadly not surprising, even if I would personally argue it's shambolic on every level.
Anonymous: I think the media have misunderstood the situation, in regards to Susan Sarandon and Melissa Barrera, they think Israel is the Hero, and Palestine is the villain, unlike the Ukraine and Russia war where it is that simple, this isn't that simple.
Louis: Anyway subject change, regarding 2005, I thought Munich was an OK film, do you think that it would have been better had it been about the actual 1972 Olympic bombings, rather than the aftermath, I feel that the suspense could have been truly great?.
The Killer: Richard Burton The Lawyer: Brock Peters Dolores: Moira Shearer The Brute: Mike Mazurki The Expert: Kathleen Byron The Client: Joe E. Brown
Thomas:
I mean it's been a long time, so who knows.
Anonymous:
I'd rather not get into, it is an important issue to be sure, but there are many alternative avenues to have such discussions. I will just say I do believe in freedom of speech, and leave it at that.
Louis: As someone mentioned High and Low, what would you make of a 2020s adaptation with Hidetoshi Nishijima and Masaki Okada in Mifune and Yamazaki's roles?
I'm of a similar mind as Tahmeed. People should have a platform to openly, civily talk about current issues. I'm just not sure a blog dedicated to films/actors is that platform.
As for the various celebrity comments and mishaps...well, politics have always been a delicate thing for talent agencies. The blunt reality is that when famous people say something, thousands or millions of others hear it. As such, freedom of speech still applies to them but so does the responsibility of knowing what they say/how it will be percieved.
Definitely can see Okada, I'd say maybe someone more innately intense in presence though for Gondo.
Tony:
Butler - (Always quite good in his overall more comedic presence as the most macho extreme man versus milquetoast Frasier, and his way of playing off of them. What works so well about his performance is how really overt he is in his energy that is explosive in a different way from Grammer, that blends in ideally as a pseudo antagonist. When pushed comedically he was always ready to play, such as his more comical way of breaking down when Frasier has to be built up after he gets dumped by a woman. But, he's also quite good in the scene where he pledges his genuine love to Roz, and tries to back peddle it to save face. He's honestly moving in showing Bulldog's vulnerability, and successfully grants the depth to a largely overt character, without breaking the character either.)
Great casting choice honestly, looks right out of the comic, hopefully he doesn't get immediately shot in the face.
There's occasionally a stylish shot, usually involving shadows, in The Bravados, but mostly it looks like any old color western from the period. Not poorly shot, but not distinctive within the genre at the time. The use of color isn't really exploited fully, honestly the colors more distract from the images at the time, and give the nature of the story I think black and white probably would've been more fitting.
Summer Clouds has some beautiful shots of the countryside, and occasionally a nice moody shot in the interior, however a bit of it for suffered in comparison to Ozu. As you see just the way Naruse shoots waist up, rather than floor up, does remove a certain intimacy of the setting. But regardless, the composition and framing, is nicely handled overall, and again some eye catching exteriors. Although each of these elements aren't overly distinctive, in terms of specific shots or lighting consistently.
Tony:
Excellent choice, and the type of role Hoult should be in for a big budget films. Hope its a juicy Luthor role because it could be an ideal part for Hoult.
Just wanted to chime in regarding Mr. Robot, of which I watched the first season and a couple of episodes of season 2 back in the pandemic (meaning I can't remember about 90% of it nowadays). Malek is great, for sure.
Louis: Which of these performances could still get upgraded or you're firmly settled on. Again, want to take some off the list:
Tyrone Power in Nightmare Alley John Garfield in Body And Soul Takashi Shimura in Scandal Raymond Massey in East Of Eden Takashi Shimura in I Live In Fear Burt Reynolds in The Longest Yard Klaus Kinski in Nosferatu The Vampire Klaus Maria Brandauer n Mephisto Om Puri in East Is East Russell Crowe in Gladiator Paul Newman in Road To Perdition Michael Gambon in The Half-Blood Prince Bradley Cooper in The Place Beyond The Pines Joaquín Cosío in The Perfect Dictatorship Rachel McAdams in Spotlght
None of those performances will be raised up to a 5.
I'll probably see Wish at some point...not anytime soon.
Picture:
Oppenheimer (Winner) The Holdovers Poor Things Killers of the Flower Moon Anatomy of a Fall Barbie The Color Purple American Fiction Maestro Past Lives
Oppenheimer, The Holdovers, Poor Things, Killers, seem all pretty easy to predict as each having the praise and really in different tastes to a degree. Barbie I think will get in regardless, however I do think it could be like Top Gun Maverick, where it could perform well yet still underperform in ways at the same time. Sticking with Anatomy as the foreign leap, particularly since so much is in English anyways, and pretty digestible. The Color Purple initial reactions, while I bet reviews will temper a bit in comparison, is enough to predict it in the bottom half. American Fiction has a bad campaigner, but I think is getting enough praise in the right places. Maestro is helped by being Netflix's potential top priority, but I will say the reviews, while largely positive, do suggest it has some weakness, which I will get to more of in a moment. Past Lives, I'm holding onto, but I will need some resurgence with the critics to remind the academy.
Director:
Christopher Nolan - Oppenheimer (Winner) Yorgos Lanthimos - Poor Things Martin Scorsese - Killers of the Flower Moon Alexander Payne - The Holdovers Justine Triet - Anatomy of a Fall
I think even if Oppenheimer falls victim of the preferential ballot in picture, this is aligning to be Nolan's year finally. Lanthimos actually wasn't a slam dunk for the Favourite, so I do think is room for doubt, but I think directors go for him still. Scorsese seems safe, but there are enough general reservations for the film that it will keep him from win number 2. Really Payne's most "directed" film in some ways, so if they're welcoming him back in general, I think he definitely gets in. The foreign contender, is typically fifth (I'm sure Berger was sixth) so Triet fits well into that.
Actor:
Bradley Cooper - Maestro (Winner) Cillian Murphy - Oppenheimer Leonardo DiCaprio - Killers of the Flower Moon Paul Giamatti - The Holdovers Jeffrey Wright - American Fiction
I actually do think Cooper could fall off like he did for A Star is Born after being presumed the winner for that. BUT, I think only Murphy can stop him by virtue of the natural boon you get for playing a famous person. DiCaprio is DiCaprio, but I don't think he has a chance of winning based on the nature of the role however I won't doubt him for a nomination. If he was going against other fictional characters, I think Giamatti would have more of a chance to win but I think he definitely gets in if Holdovers is doing well overall. Fifth is tough, going with Wright just because he's in a presumed best picture nominee, and he's certainly well respected. I could easily switch to Domingo or Scott though.
Lily Gladstone - Killers of the Flower Moon (Winner) Emma Stone - Poor Things Carey Mulligan - Maestro Fantasia Barrino - The Color Purple Sandra Huller - Anatomy of a Fall
Gladstone has such a strong narrative and praise that it seems unlikely she'll miss. Stone seems like Blanchett last year, and I think if critics go all in her, and she plays the game, she could win again. Mulligan I don't think is a lock, but if Cooper's winning it seems like she's getting in given she's gotten more praise overall. Barrino seems obvious if Purple is in picture. Huller cannot be a lock, but if they embrace Anatomy it is hard not to check her name off for it.
Supporting Actor:
Robert Downey Jr. - Oppenheimer (Winner) Ryan Gosling - Barbie Mark Ruffalo - Poor Things Robert De Niro - Killers of the Flower Moon Dominic Sessa - The Holdovers
I think the top four are obvious at this venture at least, all in powerful films, all extremely well praised, all respected. Going with Sessa now, just hard to see him being ignored completely if the film is in the top five, he has the toughest road, but I can see him being a Lucas Hedges, even if he's definitely co-lead.
Supporting Actress:
Danielle Brooks - The Color Purple (Winner) Da'Vine Joy Randolph - The Holdovers Taraji P. Henson - The Color Purple Jodie Foster - Nyad Emily Blunt - Oppenheimer
Brooks in the early word is getting all the praise, so easy enough to see her to join other Tony to Oscar winners. Randolph (who I'd move up to a 4.5 on re-watch personally), can win as well, but a nomination seems easy enough. Henson does seem on shakier ground but seems like an easiest enough choice at this venture. Definitely a little personal bias on my part in predicting Foster, but Netflix ought to get someone in, and she's who most come away talking about from that film. Blunt, sure, though I do think Oppenheimer must perform at its apex for that.
Louis: Regarding your list of the top 5 Ebert reviews, were you referring to the contemporaneous reviews of Bonnie & Clyde, Raging Bull, and Hoop Dreams, or the Great Movies essays on them?
Also, how do you think Siskel & Ebert differed in terms of their approaches to film?
Oppenheimer (Winner) Killers of the Flower Moon Poor Things Barbie American Fiction
If it's my best picture predictions this seems an easy set, and yes I don't believe the academy will buy Barbie in original nonsense (at least I hope, as that would set a bad precedent).
Original Screenplay:
The Holdovers (Winner) Anatomy of a Fall Maestro Past Lives May December
Best picture nominees again, and I guess May December. But I could see many a dark horse take the fifth spot, or the fourth spot if Past Lives loses all momentum.
Cinematography:
Oppenheimer (Winner) Killers of the Flower Moon Poor Things Maestro The Color Purple
All are flashy, previously nominated cinematographers, no reason to doubt any. I do think Zal/Zone of Interest is a possible spoiler even if Zone of Interest is a limited player overall.
Costumes:
Barbie (Winner) Poor Things Killers of the Flower Moon The Color Purple Wonka
Top four seem easy. Wonka seems like a possible fifth with the amount/creativity of the costumes, though I think Napoleon, Oppenheimer or Priscilla, *could* show up.
Editing:
Oppenheimer (Winner) Killers of the Flower Moon Poor Things Maestro The Holdovers
All have a certain "flash" from my understanding or pedigree in the top four. Often at least one film the academy just loves gets in here even without flashy editing, and that's The Holdover spot.
Makeup & Hair-styling:
Poor Things (Winner) Maestro Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 3 Barbie Nyad
I'm quite surprised by Poor Things being low in many predictions in this category, as I would think Dafoe's appearance alone would guarantee this. Maestro is the point of controversy but still transformation/age, is an easy sell. Guardians has a ton of it, so you think it would be rewarded. Barbie again has plenty of flash if slightly less intense. Nyad's I'll admit I was quite impressed by as Bening's face just looked genuinely messed up, so I think it could make it.
Production Design:
Barbie (Winner) Poor Things Oppenheimer Killers of the Flower Moon The Color Purple
Hard to see one missing out just by the potential strengths of the films to back them up, combined with how showy all of them seem to be. Additionally the academy will ignore Anderson and Scott in all categories, if they're already set on ignoring them.
Score:
Bake off will likely prove me wrong.
Oppenheimer (Winner) Poor Things Killers of the Flower Moon The Zone of Interest The Killer
Oppenheimer is a no duh. Killers is a chance to posthumously recognize Robertson, and it is perhaps the one time he won't be disqualified for working with Scorsese. Even if Zone is mostly ignored, the branch seems to love Levi. Going on a limb with The Killer, but Reznor/Ross have the pedigree, and it's a score that stands out.
With the backlog coming next month, these are my suggestions:
Utpal Dutt in Agantuk Alan Cumming in Josie And The Pussycats Leland Orser in Faults Tatsuya Nakadai in Kill! (I think this is the last remaining 4.5 from completed rounds that could still go up) Laurence Fishburne and Jeff Goldblum in Deep Cover (Goldblum for the prediction contest)
"I'm Just Ken" - Barbie (Winner) "What Was I Made For" - Barbie "Wish" - Wish "Keep It Movin'" - The Color Purple "Road to Freedom" - Rustin
I was quite disturbed when it was apparent that WB wasn't pushing "I'm Just Ken" at first, thankfully now they're pushing both it and "What Was I Made For". I think both get in. Wish isn't apparently knocking people's socks off, but the academy loves their Disney songs. The Color Purple's new song sure, though the academy will call BS, sometimes on "let's get an Oscar" songs, however precedent says to predict it. I don't think there's any crappy Diane Warren songs to get nominated, so the Rustin song, why not.
Sound:
Oppenheimer (Winner) The Color Purple Maestro Killers of the Flower Moon Napoleon
If the academy can nominate best picture nominees in the category they do, and all four seem easy enough fits...though I think Killers can miss here. Napoleon definitely has all the sounds with the battles, so sure why not.
Visual Effects:
Oppenheimer (Winner) Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Poor Things Napoleon The Creator
Oppenheimer has a great narrative with "all practical", Guardians has a lot and actually was a lot better than many recent Marvel efforts, so I think it gets in. Poor Things by virtue, of if the academy can nominate a best picture nominee they often do. Napoleon, because that does have quite the scope, so sure. The Creator is garbage, but the visuals were good technically speaking, so why not.
Animated Feature:
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Winner) The Boy and the Heron Elemental Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget
Sounds like Wish won't happen, so Elemental will fill that spot. Spider-man and Heron seem very safe. Turtles has all the praise so I think so. And Chicken Run, sure as long as it gets the reviews, as the academy usually likes Aardman. The Academy typically ignores Illumination so I think they'll probably ignore Mario despite its box office.
The contemporary reviews, I didn't consider his great films essays, which I think are separate.
I actually don't think they differed all *that* much despite the intensity of their disagreements at times, as when they agreed or disagreed together the ease of their conversations shows how they were in a similar frame of mind, as both would praise, story, technique, character and theme. They often worked with each other voices, and not that they were carbon copies but they were both very talented at articulating their praise or dismay.
In the disagreements though, I think Siskel and Ebert had their favored directors, and would go to bat for them separately more fervently, like Siskel for Kubirck (Full Metal Jacket), Ebert for Scorsese (Casino). But also Siskel tended to want the film to be something and if it failed to achieve that intention he was more critical of it. Where Ebert would more often fall into taking the intention of the piece and praise if it met even a perceived lower standard. However Ebert also would more often throw a whole film out for a single element, which was less typical for Siskel, like giving Die Hard a negative review essentially for Paul Gleason's character.
Hello guys and Louis, I came across the blog a few months ago and I'm pleased to have found a site that values all opinions without getting abuse from trolls such as on Film Twitter or World Of Reel. I've really enjoyed all your reviews and thoughts on individual elements of films aside from acting which is what this blog is primarily about. I look forward to bringing some input to topics in the near future and beyond.
Jonathan: Welcome to the family. I've browsed World Of Reel quite a few times in the past and the comment section there is beyond toxic. Majority of the readers there are douchebags. I do think Jordan Ruimy (the owner) is go to when it comes to breaking the news first.
I'm mentally preparing myself to get Farewell'ed (though I do think critics will rally behind it more, hopefully) so I'll try not to be too pissy about it missing out on things, but I will be annoyed if, for example, Barbie takes up a spot in Original Screenplay and Past Lives misses out.
Jonathan: And I look forward to your opinions. Fair warning, you'll have difficulty asking questions that haven't already been answered so if your looking for any info in particular, try site:actoroscar.blogspot.com insert keyword and you should find what you are looking for.
Also went to an early screening of Maestro last night. Found it to be pretty meh altogether.
Bradley Cooper - 4 (had some iffy spots, but found it a rock solid effort regardless) Carey Mulligan - 3.5 (the writing does no justice to her character, but she definitely makes the most out of it) Matt Bomer - 2.5 Maya Hawke - 2 Sarah Silverman - 1.5
Louis and everyone: This sort of got swallowed up with the older comments, but thoughts on these two scenes from "Mississipi Burning"? I fully see your take on 88's best actor race, Louis; Most every nominee is solid/good, but Hackman has some truly strong moments in his performance.
Mitchell: He does what he can with some really trashy material, but I fail to see the greatness of the performance. He plays the role as written, as well as anyone possibly can, but where’s the meat? The character is a well-worn archetype that he doesn’t actually shed. It’s well-played, but there’s nothing in Hackman’s approach that raises the role beyond just that. He’s done better both before and after. I’ll grant that he’s better than Hoffman (my least favorite win for Actor), but in a year that could have given us Irons, Hoskins, or Malkovich, it’s paltry work in comparison.
For the lack of a better word, some adorable imagery there I will say, and a charming little upbeat tune to back it up. As per usual, have little idea of what is going on based on it, but nice looking/sounding intro.
8000's:
The first clip is a charming little story, and to hear Ozu's personality wasn't too surprising. The second is a quietly powerful bit of writing from Ozu, again not too surprising.
Johnathan Williams:
Welcome.
Each time is a bit different. In 2001, the substantial uses are "Also sprach Zaarathustra" and "The Blue Danube", and feels naturally befitting to the idea of the advancement of humankind by scoring them with great human achievements in terms of the pieces of classical music. The former being the grandest of the grandiose of being the initial advancement, however the cut to immediately "Blue" changes the emphasis to a kind of grace and ease of the later development as the technology just becomes seemingly part of humankind.
Where the former would have not been a more "elevated" ambition, Kubrick I suppose immediately subverts that by using Beethoven as the music of a wretched degenerate and as the theme for the torture of said degenerate. Both in this instance seem to denigrate the music, as now rather the scoring of human evolution, essentially the complete opposite, though as effective in making this point.
Barry Lyndon's use is the masterstroke of the film, in kind of being the bow on the entire concept of transporting to period, by scoring the film through what would've been contemporary, though brought to life as dynamically as possible in terms of arrangement and performance, however crafting what would be the music Barry would be "backed" by in reality of the time.
I'll give thoughts on how previously existing songs are used, but don't give thoughts on the songs themselves, just as I don't want to broach those floodgates. Anyway, I always found the gingerbread man scene one of the better scene, and to me better exploited the idea of the subversion of the fairy tale by playing into it in Farquaad playing into the rhymes while also going about the torture.
Less crazy about "Hallelujah" as let's throw a popular song over it within the early 2000's animated films was not the approach I loved, and the montage work here I find to be just "fine". Additionally the animated film trope, of let's sulk in our corners before the third act, is something that unless done perfectly is a bit tired, and this was not done perfectly.
Didn't love the episode, I thought everyone was acting way too broadly, even for Fargo, except Temple and Morris, and it failed to really pull me into it as every other season opening has. I'll say the action was done well, though the stupidity of the men was a bit much (I mean why wouldn't they tie up Temple more, or at least child lock the back doors to their car?), but I didn't really care. I'll give the next episode a chance, but I was a bit "eh" while watching this one.
Mitchell:
Hearing any Hackman performance being called "paltry" even in comparison is a Batsignal for me. But I don't really have much to add to my original review. It's a good "meat and potatoes" performance from him in a somewhat underwritten role, as his and Dafoe's dynamic isn't quite there, and the whole I idea of his background as a southern Sheriff needed more to it. However, Hackman makes everything that he does look easy, but not because it was easy, but because he's Gene Hackman and is an amazing actor. Other than maybe Robert Duvall, I doubt anyone would have made the part look as easy, in terms of the menace, the intensity and bringing out any depth that can be mined (The McDormand relationship doesn't quite work but Hackman brings genuine emotion there, and the same is for the scene where he describes his father's racism, again a concept that I think needed more in terms of the character's background but Hackman's delivery of that scene does find more meat than most, eh I'll say any, actor could've found with it and made it look as easy. Having said that, there were indeed greater turns that year, hence why he doesn't make my top ten.
The first scene is a fascinating scene to look at after the series as a whole, because initially you take it as a scene showing just the point of desperation and really the end of the rope that Walt is in. You believe him when he says "he never had any choice", but what we learn later about Gray Matter even is that's probably not the truth. And what this scene though in itself is that Walt ends up merging choices as he does the chemo, but instead of marking time, he does the most horrible thing to "be alive" in becoming the drug kingpin.
Hilarious moment that is always hard to remember how light their dynamic was at times, in the comedy so natural in just how ramshackle the operation was, with Jesse then the idiot and Walt basically the constantly frustrated teacher still.
Probably one of few moments of levity in what was one of the tense portions of the show, particularly when watching it contemporaneously. And hilarious in the simplicity of the call back by pointing out the insanity of where Jesse and Walt are in the moment, without at all breaking the tension. Although now the positions revered.
Louis: This is one of few places on the internet where you can say anything without incurring the wrath of Shrek fans, so I'd be happy to learn your opinion on Fairytale if you don't mind.
Saw Saltburn, overall I quite enjoyed it, the ensemble is quite strong even though a couple of the supporting performances didn’t work for me. Keoghan is fantastic.
Louis and anyone else who’s seen Napoleon: Would you recommend just waiting for the Director’s Cut of Napoleon and watch that instead? The fact that there’s going to be a better (I’m guessing) version of the film later on is deterring me from watching the cut that’s already out tbh.
I was unfortunately disappointed by Saltburn, visually stylish, there are individual scenes I liked, but overall, I found on the line between homage and derivative it fell closer to the latter again, and again. The film seems to think two revelations in it are going to be surprising, and rests much of its impact on them, however I found both quite obvious and predictable. If there was more depth, more wit, to the rest, I might've not cared. However, I found the whole culture/class clash was explored in a fairly rudimentary and rote fashion. Nothing in it finds any great insight, nor is it ever terribly surprising. The characters have potential, however I feel like they're all part of ideas for the most part, and could've been so much more.
I will save Keoghan though.
Elordi - 3.5 Pike - 4 Grant - 3.5 Oliver - 4 Madekwe - 2 Mulligan - 3 Rhys - 3 Mitchell - 3
Regarding 88 best actor lineup discussion that Rob and Mitchell were having, my favorite there is actually Hanks in Big. Really love that performance. Irons is my overall win though.
And maybe Ewan McGregor in The Ghost Writer (Strongest 4.5 in 2010 Lead and is still his career best). I'm thinking of requesting him for a review down the track because I rather feel that the opportunity will never be there to get a 5 rating in his career.
Perfectionist: Out of the actual nominees, I've seen everyone but Sydow. Hackman is an easy choice for me out of those four, but I still like Olmos, Hanks and even Hoffman to varying degrees.
The overall year, however, is one I've really been sleeping on (Apologies to Irons and Malkovich).
I watched Napoleon, but can't really give any thoughts on it because my sleep-deprived dumbass dozed off for about an hour during it. All I can say is that you can really tell the whole thing is rushed and is a 2 and half hour version of a much longer movie.
Also, fwiw, Kirby was making the strongest impression in me.
Well all I can say all three are brilliantly articulated forms of passion. Ebert in each review manages to not just describe what he likes about it, but more so what he experienced within each film. How he felt within each film, and he so well shares his experience almost to the point of an empathetic reaction from reading it. You may not feel the same way about the film, but you more than understand Ebert's reaction, you feel them. Each though also are great pinpoints in each phase of Ebert, Bonnie and Clyde being the passion of the young reviewer ready to praise his first masterpiece as a reviewer, Raging Bull in the middle ground of full coming into his own, and then in Hoop Dreams, the critic who takes an even further path to create an even greater reflection in the reviews of someone who has done it for decades at that point.
Print. He and Siskel together is what made their TV film criticism great, as evidenced by when Ebert had lesser partners later on, it just wasn't the same.
Fennell, along with Zeller (The Son) and Zhao (Eternals) is another filmmaker who reached her peak in 2020 and then stumbled tragically in the next film. Will Lee Isaac Chung suffer the same fate with Twisters?
PS: Fincher must be laughing out loud in their faces.
I mean everything referenced in the interview I'm familiar with, but a good articulation regardless of the appeal of the two, the growth of the two and what their reviews did deliver successfully.
Robert:
Nah, though I have seen some placing him as a dark horse contender for a nomination in best actor, but I don't really see it.
Bryan:
1970's The Killer directed by Brian De Palma:
The Killer: Robert Shaw The Expert: Geraldine Fitzgerald The Lawyer: Woody Strode The Client: Ralph Bellamy Dolores: Hilary Mason The Brute: Richard Kiel
1970's The Holdovers directed by Billy Wilder:
Paul Hunham: Walter Matthau Angus Tully: Keith Carradine Mary Lamb: Marla Gibbs
1990's Rustin directed by John Singleton:
Rustin: Paul Winfield Martin Luther King: Clarke Peters Roy Wilkins: John Amos Adam Powell Jr.: Delroy Lindo
I'm not really a big fan of the term overrated, but here's five performers who I've personally not seen their level of talent match their level of exposure/recognition fully.
Keira Knightley (and it is easy to forget how young she is actually, given how long she's been around at this point.) Finn Wolfhard John David Washington Tye Sheridan Logan Lerman
But hey, always ready for an actor to turn around, I might've put Dev Patel on such a list a decade ago, now I'm genuinely excited when he's in something.
Mitchell: Not sure if you're already aware of this, but if you haven't, let me just tell you that Spider-Man always holds back his strength when fighting bad guys. If he didn't hold back, Spidey could kill a normal bad guy with one punch.
Louis: thoughts on the scene in Judgement at Nuremberg where Widmark’s character shows the clips of the camps to the court and the subsequent scene after with the judges discussing it?
Jena Malone Harry Melling Lewis Pullman Alden Ehrenreich Margaret Qualley
Mia Goth just fell off the list, after being properly recognized for her work by many last year.
Anonymous:
A scene technically of its time as a way to show real footage of the Holocaust naturally to audiences in a widespread fashion. It works though in context of the film, without feeling exploitative, by presenting all of the legal grey areas Rolfe is trying to utilize don't really matter when you see the blunt and real result of what the judges were complicit in. And you see that it probably all Widmark's character needed to show to crush Rolfe's defense. And it's great acting by Schell because you see just how even Rolfe is taken aback by the footage, and essentially has to work up towards his defense of trying obfuscate the idea of guilt to either those directly responsible or blame everyone.
Louis: For Best Original Score 88 and 93, where would you rank Grave Of The Fireflies and The Nightmare Before Christmas respectively.
And could you rank the types of animation (Hand-Drawn, Stop-Motion, Computer-Generated etc) from favourite to least favourite with your reasons why for each.
8000s: Not sure where I've mentioned that before, but yes...that's 100% correct for a character whose stopped speeding trains, and fights on par with Venom and Rhino. You could make that argument for most superpowered heroes, I think. Hell...one of Superman's big struggles is never being able unleash his full strength, lest the earth itself be anihilated.
Louis: No problem, could you take a look at this archived version of the article instead? You'd likely be familiar with most of the information laid out in the first half, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts on the article's analysis of Siskel and Ebert's approach and film criticism in general: https://archive.is/Jbyo6
1. Hand drawn 2. Stop Motion 3. Computer Generated
Computer Generated is getting better thanks to the influence of Spider-Verse, but it is the medium that dates the fastest, and the general aesthetic is least interesting/even adaptable. Even more so, I find mediocre and bad CGI to be the most aggressively dull and the least tolerable. The period where CGI reigned exclusively in the 00's, also corresponds to so much disposable films, that other than a few select efforts no one is nostalgic for, for a reason.
Stop Motion I will say is perhaps slightly limited in that if one is doing stop motion, it has to work within certain styles of storytelling, as it's never going to be realistic for example, per its nature. However, contrasting that it is singular in a way that has its appeal within itself, that makes it unique in a way that no other form can match nor deliver on as is. And there is even something specifically visceral in seeing the best stop motion, because all of it "exists" and there is a nearly subconscious thrill in watching it.
Hand drawn is an easy choice because there is so much one can do with it, in so many different ways, styles and choices. You can make a completely realistic film hand drawn, you can do the craziest adventure, and you can do it in so many different ways from top to bottom. There is no limit to choices with hand drawn in terms of ambition, Loving Vincent, Spirited Away, Pinocchio, The Plague Dogs, all the same technical form but couldn't be more different all the same.
Tony:
I think it speaks accurately to essentially their appeal within the idea of film criticism, because as articulate as the two could be, they were always approachable and practical in their film criticism. As the two typically never forgot that easy question of "is it worth watching" which can be lost sometimes when one approaches film criticism by subtext/meaning first. And I think the article managed to tie that into their beginnings as critics coming out of non-critic positions quite artfully. And I think in general that is what made them popular, along with the competitive nature of their chemistry the article also mentions, because even when talking about the most "prestigious" effort by a filmmaker they still came at it with the sense of film goer, even if they could develop their thoughts as a proper critic.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on the opening/initial betrayal in Rustin? It slightly bothered me that the film heavy-handedly absolves King of the responsibility of making amends with Rustin, as I think mining those moments would have led to something pretty interesting.
Louis: Your thoughts on Siskel's "actors' lunch" test, and would you say most films you don't give a pass to generally fail this test? Or would you agree with Richard Brody in that it would depend on who's directing the footage?
Also, your top 5 films since 2013 that you'd most like to see a hypothetical Siskel & Ebert conversation on.
Wish is bad. Every story beat unearned. Every song unmemorable. Every side character a pest. Internal logic straight from Kingdom Hearts. They even bungled the execution of making the villain irredeemable.
I also watched Wish on a night where I was picking seemingly bad movies to watch. A great choice I must say. Jesus Christ, Disney is the shits. I think I'll skip on Marvels after watching this soulless cashgrab(that isn't grabbing much cash). Absolutely horrible writing and bad music, We get Disney leaning into referencing better movies again. Eye-rolling to see characters like the goat from Zootopia here. This is the cheapness we're dealing with,
The opening actually got me thinking that the film might be more than the trailer suggested, despite Rock being clearly out of his depth acting wise, but it's a false start that doesn't really go anywhere properly, including the use of King, which it just kind of hand waves in terms of the initial betrayal.
Luke:
Neill gives it his all, delivering his lines like a great Shakespearean monologue, however it was clearly not written Shakespeare, as it is kind of blathering nonsense, but kudos to Neill for the conviction. Although weakened a bit by the dull visual of the dark room, and him just kind of wandering around, with the statue of Christ just kind of there. I can kind of see the idea the scene was going for, but other than Neill, it doesn't work.
The second scene is similar, again Neill's giving it his evil all, the speech though feels repetitive and almost silly because of its repetitiveness. The sound design of the echo of Neill's vice diminishes it. The crowd shots too diminished by the dumb light passing by. Even the crowd's response, which actually is creepy at first, comes off as kind of dumb once they start rapidly repeating it, as in unison it sounded eerie, separately started to sound sloppy.
I'm sensing again the lack of greatness by the camerawork, but that was some out of context strong work by Giamatti. One that he didn't seem completely out of place to begin with, given he's such a modern and distinctly American actor. He's convincing even when going toe to toe with Brian Cox, who you would expect in such a role, in terms of presence however also quite captivating in presenting John's petulance combined with threat but also vulnerability, as the man so adamantly needing to prove himself he does so only with terror.
Tony:
Not one that I quite agree with as I don't think it accounts for ambitious failures, which typically aren't boring but are bad. Also not everyone who makes films is necessarily interesting, sometimes why their films are not, so maybe their film is boring and they're boring too. Could happen.
The Irishman Parasite Batman v. Superman Phantom Thread Collateral Beauty
Jonathan Williams:
A genuinely intense scene, in part just how evil they drew the bear, but through the pacing of the sequence where the danger is ever present for every character in the fight, particularly the split moments in the attack, including the key emotional one, which wholly works, of Tod coming back to help. And while I think the animation of the period is a few notches below peak Disney of any era, there's some nice touches around the waterfall, in terms of the sound design and the condensation from the water that work rather nicely.
193 comments:
1933 has already been done. Could you do a review of 1936?
Typo was meant to be 32.
What would your updated Lead and Supporting Actress look like now?
Wow, after that review I honestly thought Quayle might take the win, or at least runner up.
Louis: Thoughts on the 3.5+ supporting performances.
Watching South Pacific now, and I have to know who's bright idea it was to do these ugly filters? It looks so bad
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on Dirk Bogarde and Chikage Awashima/Ganjiro Nakamura (the latter wasn't ranked for Summer Clouds.)
Ratings and Thoughts on Leslie French, Richard Attenborough (The Man Upstairs and Sea Of Sand), Michel Simon, Pine and Bernardi, Trevor Howard, Gérard Séty, Tadeusz Fijewski, Myron McCormack, Eddie Albert, Lee Van Cleef, Stephen Boyd, Lino Ventura, Walter Matthau, Erich Maria Remarque & Klaus Kinski and Paul Scofield
Your Updated Female rankings.
Louis: Films To Watch (Apologies for the length, I'm currently doing deep dives of the silent era to present. Watch whatever interests you the most)
Vampyr
Shanghai Express
The Blood Of A Poet
Island Of Lost Souls
Boudu Saved From Drowning
The Sign Of The Cross
Wooden Crosses
I Was Born, But…
Where Now Are The Dreams Of Youth?
Broken Lullaby
Emma
Fanny
Night At The Crossroads
Two Seconds
Blonde Venus
L'Atlantide
Red-Headed Woman
The Red Head
No Blood Relation
Ivan
Arsène Lupin
Rome Express
Love Me Tonight
One Way Passage
One Hour With You
Merrily We Go To Hell
Red Dust
Service For Ladies
Frisco Jenny
Blessed Event
Three On A Match
Horse Feathers
Murders In The Rue Morgue
Rasputin And The Empress
Doctor X
Letty Lynton
Tiger Shark
Me And My Gal
American Madness
Back Street
Smilin' Through
Air Mail
Dainah the Mulatto
What Price Hollywood?
Call Her Savage
Movie Crazy
Devil And The Deep
Payment Deferred
Hell's Highway
So Big
Forbidden
Union Depot
Downstairs
Night After Night
What Scoundrels Men Are!
No Man Of Her Own
Faithless
Flesh
20,000 Years In Sing Sing
Hot Saturday
Thirteen Women
Queen Kelly
The Cabin In The Cotton
The Blue Light
Million Dollar Legs
If I Had A Million
This Is The Night
The Crowd Roars
Kuhle Wampe
The Purchase Price
The Mask Of Fu Manchu
The Beast Of The City
Chandu The Magician
Virtue
Ten Minutes To Live
Kongo
Skyscraper Souls
Wild Girl
Big City Blues
The Animal Kingdom
Man Wanted
Blondie Of The Follies
Cynara
As You Desire Me
Shopworn
Spring Shower
The Devil Is Driving
The Greeks Had A Word For Them
The Hatchet Man
The Strange Love Of Molly Louvain
Night World
The Age Of Consent
The Penguin Pool Murder
Three Wise Girls
The Half-Naked Truth
The Bartered Bride
I By Day, You By Night
Law And Order
Lady And Gent
Central Park
The Man Who Played God
Madame Racketeer
The Music Box
Helpmates
County Hospital
Towed In A Hole
Their First Mistake
The Chimp
Any Old Port!
Scram!
The Dentist
The Cradles
Louis: After 1966 and 1981 (and at your convenience of course) could I get an 11-20 films for 1992 and 2002? Those ll be the last for a bit.
Louis: Lastly, ratings and thoughts on Rosalind Russell in Auntie Mame and Palmer & Schneider in Madchen in Uniform.
Louis: Before you go to 1932, could you watch Giants and Toys?
https://ok.ru/video/1683941624430
Ok. South Pacific was not good. It's saving graces are the score and some of the numbers. The rest of it is pretty painfully dull, if not pretty poor. At least it's pretty when the filters aren't used. 2.5s and 3s for most of the cast members, if not lower in John Kerr's case.
Louis: I'm with you on Ted and Rebecca. What kept me from being more on-board, though, is that Waddingham and Sudeikis had good platonic chemistry but basically zero romantic chemistry.
I should've specified - I was referring to just the conversation between Ted and Rebecca in particular, because that's where the show seemed to nearly go out of its way to set up *everything* needed for the couple to happen at that moment, only to change its mind anyway. Even as someone who wasn't a big "shipper" of the two I can understand why some viewers were frustrated. Could I get your thoughts on that specific scene, if you haven't given them elsewhere?
Louis: Michel Simon in Boudu Saved From Drowning and Charles Laughton in Island Of Lost Souls & The Sign Of The Cross are performances that should be considered for write-ups.
Greetings everyone. I have a new post on my blog currently; It's a bit different from the one's I've done before, but I hope you guys like it.
Found Rustin to fall hard into the "it's fine...I guess" category of biopics. There are some more inspired moments/ideas in terms of the infighting within the civil rights movement involving the participation of the titular character and getting over the biases of those in the system with him. But for every inspired moment there's at least five extremely standard biopic moments. All filtered through George C. Wolfe's direction that falls hard into a workman's "generalized prestige" playbook, that limits what is in the film. Not a bad film, but seems like a far greater film could've been made named Rustin.
Rock - 2
Turman - 3
Ameen - 3
Pounder - 3
Potts - 3
Wright - 3(Even if he seemed like he was still in a Wes Anderson movie)
McDonald - 3
Harper - 2.5
Ramey - 3
Louis: Thoughts on the cast.
Never change, Chris Rock. Never change lol
ruthiehenshallfan99: I still have nightmares about those bright orange filters lol its so amateurish even for the time.
Edward G. Robinson, Two Seconds
Michel Simon, Boudu Saved from Drowning
Charles Laughton, Island of Lost Souls
Fredric March, Merrily We Go to Hell
Lee Tracy, Blessed Event
Walter Huston, American Madness
Raimu, Fanny
James Cagney, Winner Take All
Lionel Barrymore, Rasputin and the Empress
John Gilbert, Downstairs
Maurice Chevalier, One Hour with You
James Cagney, Taxi!
Clark Gable, Red Dust
Fernandel, He
Spencer Tracy, Me and My Girl
Eward G. Robinson, Tiger Shark
Supp
Lowell Sherman, What Price Hollywood?
Lionel Barrymore, The Broken Lullaby
Tatsuo Saitô, I Was Born, But...
Harry Baur, Poil de Carotte
Boris Karloff, Night World
Charles Laughton, Sign of the Cross
Taxi! is 1931 according to IMDB.
Louis: Is Quayle's performance one of the more unfortunate cases of being the lowest five in his ranking.
Sadly The Killer may have been a mere exception in the Fassbender curse, where once reliable filmmakers deliver one of their worst films after casting him. As while this is better than Love & Thunder, it's not very good. Taika Waititi has become self aware, after achieving mainstream success and become largely unfunny and nearly intolerable onscreen, which is once again the case here but thankfully his screentime is limited. But 75 percent of the gags sink like an anvil, 20 percent could work but are ruined by bad timing with the editing and direction. That leaves only few chuckles left. The feel good underdog story, has potential but that is only vaguely realized in a few moments. The skeletons of the arcs are there but the meat is missing. Key moments either are rushed through or appear missing. Fassbender does what he can, particularly in a locker room speech, but largely he's saddled selling weak material.
Fassbender- 3.5
Kightley - 3
Kaimana - 3.5
Fane - 2.5
House - 2.5
Arnett - 2.5
Moss - 2.5
Darby - 2
Waititi - 1
Louis: Thoughts on these trailers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnPl4PuNb5U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiQvFKfpCi4
Louis: What would your updated Lead and Supporting Actress top 10s be for 1958?
I’d go lower for Fassbender in Next Goal Wins actually, I think for most of the film he should have taken a lighter approach, which I actually think would have made that last locker room speech more affecting.
Anonymous:
French - 4(A performance that honestly has much built up to as the target of our trained army assassin. French though comes in quite unassuming enough as just a fairly charming though modest middle aged man. He has a kindness, even if like our protagonist, you want to be immediately suspicious of his kindness. French though grants much detail to the character in bringing a natural warmth about him with his family and you struggle yourself with the idea of if you could really kill this man. Then his final scene is absolutely brutal, French's performance is heartbreaking just through the visceral detail of it, and just making it a truly painful moment to watch.)
Attenborough - 4(All that intensity but not enough places to go with it. Attenborough is selling much in the character just being on the extreme edge, and is wholly convincing as a man who is falling apart. He has a force about him that is potent in itself, sadly the film doesn't really aid him by providing him anything interesting to do other than be upset in a generalized way.)
Simon - 4(A moving portrayal of the man setup by the public to be the killer. Simon portrays the petrifying fear powerful in being lost in such an honest way, yet with this simple sort of manner about him that makes him passive as something others can accuse of him. Simon's performance is filled with such desperation consistently and presents such a terrible tragedy of the man who finds himself truly as the wrong person at the wrong time. Giving complete humanity to this character and the unfortunate treatment of him.)
Pine & Bernardi - 4(Both I think are terrific in setting up what was not as common of a type at all of the more sarcastic type henchmen, both with their own personalities, even if tied to the professional hitman, both scared yet undercutting in their own ways. Pine brings this foolish pompousness of a man who thinks there's nothing to kill yet the weakness in every delivery paints him the fool, and Bernardi as just the man scared of the whole thing and just stuck on following the easiest route.)
Howard - 4(The most interesting character in the piece, where Howard is quite effective in presenting this state of mania, of a man just emphasizing joy, because of the fear deep within him as he faces his potential death. Howard creates this sense of anxiety beautifully by always undercutting it with the man's jovial manner, while also undercutting that by showing the man is just barely holding himself together. Unfortunately the film drops him just as his character is getting the most interesting.)
Sety - 4(Wonderful depiction of sheer exasperation of the art dealer genuinely trying to help his friend, yet neither his friend nor his clients ever do him favors. Sety though brings a wonderful sense of this comedic quality to the man's efforts, particularly in the American client scene, where in his face he's hilarious if also moving in showing the unease of the man towards the artist being the artist, while trying to smooth over every point.)
McCormack - (As the original exasperated Sergeant at his less than intelligent recruits, McCormack has wonderful comedic timing throughout, in portraying consistently the sergeant just wanting to get back to his normal routine, but being thrown off from it every time. Creating the right sense of comic anxiety as every attempt is thwarted and is an ideal foil to Griffith throughout.)
Albert - (Brings sort of that kind Albert personality in many scenes and I do like the warmth he brings in projecting the man trying to grant understanding as a superior. However his best scene is being the most intense interrogator, where Albert is wholly convincing as he puts his man through the ringer. Bringing a dynamic intensity that reveals the severity of the situation quite bluntly.)
Cleef - 3.5(Mostly Van Cleef just being evil as the henchmen he often was, however he's genuinely moving in the scene where Peck has him dead to the right, where his pleas for mercy feel absolutely honest and manages to make a disposable henchmen more than that.)
Boyd - 3.5(Quite the effective pompous sleaze ball turn that is consistently horrible as he is, though I do like his scene with Peck as well where his reactions are very specific as a man who is genuinely thinking "I've done plenty of crimes like that but not that one".)
Ventura - 3.5(Every reaction of his is great in his nefarious evil manner, where he's basically this human vulture as he longingly watches for death with a calm sadism.)
Matthau - 3.5(Enjoyable sleazebag turn from him, just plays it up and is genuinely menacing as well. It is always interesting to see that his baseline became comedic, because he could be genuinely intense as he is here and in Fail Safe.)
Remarque - 3.5(Wouldn't have imagined this was stunt casting, just a good character actor, as he immediately brings an emotive sense of gravity to his scenes, creating a real sense of the devastation of all of Germany in his calm yet potent emotional sense of delivery.)
Kinski - 3.5(I mean need an extremely sinister and sadistic soldier at a moment's notice, look no further. Makes a quick but quite effective impression in presenting the ease of the character's calm when informing someone of the worst possible news.)
Justice - 3.5(Quick but effective bit in bringing this jovial quality to the task of killing.)
Hamilton - 3.5(Always fun in playing the pompous jerk, and this is not different. Enjoyable though more for some great moments of comedic timing.)
David - 3.5(Diabolical sleaze. One note, but effectively that note.)
Nielsen - 3.5(Always funny that he became fully comic, because he actually was convincing as an actor, here in just being a right old pompous jerk with the right disregarding energy.)
Ryu - 3.5(I mean bring his natural quality as usual, and much is just the quiet way of the character announcing his own reservations with his daughter's choices, but has his main scene of the prayer which he delivers in his typically wonderfully modest way.)
Moore - 3.5(Not sure the point of his character, but there's a real gravitas in his performance, where he implies some meaning even when none can be found.)
Attenborough - 3.5(Has a bit more presence just because he's Attenborough.)
Stanton - 3.5(Fun to see him in such an early role, though he's also fun in his performance in just playing up the sloppy sleaze of the character and just being a wretched sort properly.)
Desailly - 3.5(Brings enough low key menace along with the right ambiguous note that builds towards his final explosion which is effective. Though an example of where I wish the film had dived deeper.)
Scofield - 3.5(Purely based on being Scofield, as this is an extremely standard character but he makes an impact through sheer will or just perhaps talent.)
Jagger - 3.5(Fine sleazy landowner turn.)
Thomas & Sellers - 3.5(Both playing it up effectively in just being grotesque plotters, with a nice comedic timing even if perhaps I wanted even more from them.)
Thatcher - 3.5(Brings a nice pompous evil presence, simple but it works bringing enough gravitas to the proceedings.)
Morrow - 3.5(More or less a reprise of Blackboard, but effective again as younger sleaze.)
Wynn - 3.5(His character is a weird aspect of the film, that doesn't work as well but I did like the warmer presence he brought regardless.)
Michael Patison:
1. Jean Simmons - Home Before Dark
2. Kinuyo Tanaka - The Ballad of Narayama
3. Chikage Awashima - Summer Clouds - 5
4. Elizabeth Taylor - Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
5. Kim Novak - Vertigo
6. Ingrid Bergman - The inn of the Sixth Happiness
7. Ingrid Thulin - The Brink of Life
8. Eva Dahlbeck - The Brink of Life
9. Bibi Andersson - The Brink of Life
10. Jeanne Moreau - Elevator to the Gallows
Supporting Actress:
1. Lili Palmer - The Lovers of Montparnasse
2. Sylvia Syms - Ice Cold in Alex
2. Kay Walsh - The Horse's Mouth
3. Fujiko Yamamoto - Equinox Flower
4. Irene Worth - Orders to Kill
5. Marlene Dietrich - Touch of Evil
6. Izumi Ashikawa - The Perfect Game
7. Olivia De Havilland - The Proud Rebel
8. Annie Girardot - Maigret Set a Trap
9. Hideko Takamine - The Rickshaw Man
10. Ingrid Thulin - The Magician
Luke:
Bogarde - (His performance brings a consistent life to the proceedings by adding so much charisma to his Carton. He just leaps off the screen every time he shows up and absolutely dominates. Dominates in part in just being the attorney who commands with such ease. He's captivating though in playing up the slightly roguish, cynical and self-loathing qualities with such dynamic ease once again. He makes you immediately like and engage with his Carton. Then though when the film gets more serious with him, he absolutely sells the moments of earnestness. Whether that be his sloppy declaration of love or his final decision, Bogart brings a real sense of gravity in every reaction and every moment. His performance is convincing that this is a great adaptation even though it is not.)
Nakamura - 4(Brings just the right haggard energy to his performance that provides a certain balance and natural chemistry with his co-star. They create the right sense of this mutual point of sort of not quite agreeing with how things are yet trying to find some understanding through their discussions. He brings a great blunt exasperation to it all, while also showing in his eyes this sense of the man not ignoring it but rather taking it in as much as he can even though he does not exactly love these turns of events.)
Awashima - (Just completely dynamic in her performance that brings such a command while doing so in a way in which she is technically fulfilling what is seen as the submissive role in her society. Her performance never is as such though as she exudes a natural intelligence and really this sense of reality in her work. There is so much nuance in the scenes of talking about the next generation where she brings this Emmaesque to calculation of how things should work, but also the sense of her own emotional analysis of sensing how the new have to deal with things very differently from her. She's wonderful though in showing the different sides per the situation. In moments being absolutely dominant in her manner as the woman who knows the world better than anyone, but also in the scene with the reporter, which weren't my favorites in the film, however her portrayal of the hidden want for something more feels absolutely real and tangible even if the relationship itself wasn't all that interesting.)
Michael McCarthy:
Sure.
Luke:
Russell - 4(It’s all her personality just up to the most extreme degree, and she’s there to really sell everything the film is doing. Frankly though I think it does get repetitive even though Russell is trying to sell of it, I even got a little tired of the sell. I did enjoy her quite a bit in certain moments of showing when Mame is more out of her element in particular where her great comedic energy really worked, but the scenes of her being just the wacky Aunt who is rich were less interesting to me.)
Palmer & Schneider - 4.5/4(The former I think steals the show overall because I think she finds just the right ambiguity in her performance. In that she has this modest charisma of the woman who inspires but does so gently. Though in the moments of forwardness by the student, she doesn’t portray it one way specifically yet manages to play the vague note in a way that doesn’t feel vague, creating the right complication by successfully not leaning towards an exact meaning. Schneider’s also good, though is better elsewhere, though in just being this ball of shy desperation, that switches to more overt desperation. But what’s consistent is the outward power of her onscreen presence.)
Tony:
Well I would agree with that regarding their chemistry. That scene in particular is well acted by both, and I would say they play it with a certain ambiguity with how far their love goes, and I would say the love part is a given even if not romantic. Frankly that moment though between them is the most interesting thing Rebecca had that season.
Luke:
Rock - (I mean, he’s just not that good of an actor, he is unable to really act in silent moments, he makes sitting look unnatural in his way. Here though he’s supposed to have gravitas, he has none, he’s supposed to have an emotional change, I couldn’t tell a difference because of how much everything in his work is off the immediate surface. He could’ve been worse I guess but he’s just lifeless overall.)
Harper & Ramey - (Both are designed to be overshadowed, however I will say Ramey brought a bit more in terms of not being overshadowed as much, however still was.)
Everyone else - (All good just with really quick bits even when in multiple scenes, most are built on innate presence though and have very limited characterizations to work with.)
Luke:
Fassbender - (Well on Michael’s point, I think a problem with the film is it doesn’t set up its comedic chemistry properly, which Waititi I think wants the locals to be comedic light against the intensity of Fassbender, which he does bring, but just how it is all done isn’t properly realized by the film. I don’t blame him because I think he is selling the harsh dejected coach routine well enough, he’s just working with lines that aren’t very good and setups that don’t work. When really all comedic contrasts are dropped and he’s just being dramatic though, he’s at his best, and Fassbender does bring a real honesty to his locker room speech, even if the film doesn’t properly build to the scene, Fassbender delivers it well.)
Kightley - (I went from liking his singular performance to disliking from scene to scene. Again speaks to Waititi not having it down, because he doesn’t seem sure if his character wants to be just funny or more. Therefore he’s occasionally funny, but sometimes not, and often undercuts supposed drama.)
Kaimana - (The closest to a complete arc, however the character’s low key is handled so quickly, particularly the like 3 second scene of looking at pills that is just like, really that’s all you gave it? Still has a fairly strong presence and I think is helped by Waitit treating the character in almost an entirely dramatic way. Kaimana’s performance does work as such, even if again I think there was a greater power possible here, fumbled by the writing and direction.)
Fane - (Really missing way too many scenes in terms of establishing key relationships, as every one of his is vague, he’s fine but there should’ve been more to this character.)
House - (Her bits didn’t work for me here, but at least she didn’t annoy me.)
Arnett - (Eh, he’s in it I guess.)
Moss - (Eh, she’s in it I guess.)
Darby - (Have historically loved him, but he’s used horribly by being way too broad, with his whole bit being like “what the hell are you doing Waititi?” As he’s complete parody while the rest of the film is not. Darby though also I didn’t think was really selling it well either, falling into just being wacky in a way that did not work.)
Waititi - (Never have I had a bigger turnaround I think, as I can’t stand him onscreen now, and honestly off-screen, I went from loving his interviews to finding him unbearable, and I typically don’t make it personal, however I’ve never seen someone seemingly so altered by fame. As everything about his performance here continues as a man who can do no wrong but he can do plenty. I mean “LOOK I GOT FAKE TEETH” why is this funny, it’s not. I’m doing Korg but now as a priest. Still not funny, just nails on the chalkboard.)
Tony:
Safe to say the trailer itself took several turns I did not expect, including the Clive Owen appearance, as it goes from seeming a small interpersonal thing, to The Menu and the Shining mixed together. Perhaps I'll check it out given it has already aired a couple episodes.
Was not surprised to see Barry Jenkins in the credits in the style the film evokes, and certainly a series of fairly captivating images, though obviously more than a little obtuse in terms of the trailer.
Louis: Is Lilli Palmer #11 or #12 for 58 Best Actress.
Louis: Thoughts on Theodore Bikel in I Want to Live!, Georges Poujouly in Elevator to the Gallows, Harry Guardino in Houseboat and Audie Murphy in The Quiet American.
YEEEES, a 5 for Awashima!
Louis: What is your rating and thoughts on Zach Galligan in Gremlins? I saw it for the first time recently and I was baffled to how the dog had better reaction shots.
Louis: Your thoughts on this scene from Sleuth that inspired a certain song?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saeNpo5dcdY&ab_channel=UmbrellaEntertainment
Louis: Maybe Rob Morgan instead of Rock for Rusty Wilkins?
What confounds me about Last Goal Wins is that the “underdog-sports-story” subgenre is one where you’d actively have to try to screw up. The story/arc is already there; one just has to fill in the blanks. Yet…here we are.
Everyone: Has anyone here seen "Jujutsu Kaisen"? I'm debating whether or not to watch the series myself, since there's a decent amount of episodes, but it also seems very liked.
And if you have seen it, thoughts on this? It also relates to "Chainsaw Man" which I recently finished...and have many complex thoughts on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksoHVEgVI3k&ab_channel=Doyk
Mitchell: I've seen most of the first season of Jujutsu Kaisen, and I'd definitely recommend it. Doesn't exactly reinvent any wheels of the genre, but a very good modern Shonen nonetheless.
Louis: What recurring themes and similarities have you noticed from the 1958 films you've seen?
Mitchell: JJK is definitely worth watching and it's got a great a ensemble cast of characters to reel you in. Check it out, man.
RatedRStar: Those filters in the numbers were so baffling. I'm trying to catch up on Rodgers and Hammerstein, and I am already regretting it. Here's my ranking so far
1. The Sound of Music (5): No note. An absolute favorite.
2. The King and I (4): Has notable issues, but is incredibly well done in spite of that. Also Deborah Kerr is wonderful.
3. State Fair (4): Just a wholesome good time. Not much to complain about. Just lacks a truly great performance to give it second place
4. Flower Drum Song (3): Song numbers are nice, productions values are strong,l and the performances are good, especially Nancy Kwan's but the story isn't the best.
5.South Pacific (2): Apparently, the stage version was lauded? Just about nothing truly works, but there are some wonderful songs. But songs alone can't save this.
Louis: Of all the years I've been on the blog, what movies were you most surprised that I liked/disliked?
Louis: If you considered Get Low as a 2009 film, what would Robert Duvall's position in your rank?
Shaggy: My guess is that he probably would be 4th, as the top 3 are all decade-best performances for Louis.
Louis: I asked you this on the last post, but what are your favorite portrayals of teachers/educators on film and TV?
Anonymous:
Bikel - (Very similar to his Oscar nominated role as just portraying the decent guy being decent, here just delivering some general exposition before a pretty quick exit. I think he's fine in this note but it isn't anything too notable either.)
Poujouly - (Found his romantic/hoodlum type fairly forgettable as the type goes. Not terrible or anything but not terribly memorable either.)
Guardino - (Yeah have no idea why he got that Globe nod, as he's really just pretty forgettable in general. He's not bad but doesn't have great chemistry or comedic timing. He's just kind of there.)
Murphy - (There are moments where his face seems to fall into some emotional state, that has nothing to do with the scene at hand I do wonder if it had something to do with the PTSD he unfortunately was likely suffering from. The rest of the time, he's very stiff, and given his character merely in this version is just this great American, I guess there technically shouldn't be any hidden layers. Regardless, he's just not a dynamic screen presence.)
Robert:
2 - (And that's going by having seen the film last like 25 years ago. I think it does speak to the strength of Michael J. Fox, whereas the young man in an incredible situation is such a dynamic performer. But speaking back to the forgettable Galligan, all I really remember is always having the same sort of blank expression throughout the film, and not really creating any reality in the horror of the gremlins nor a comedic sense in reacting to it. Just a bland performance all around honestly.)
Tahmeed:
Encouraging me to give Olivier the win back? Just kidding.
Seriously though amazing scene in that it wholly convinces you that Wyke is going to kill Tindle, and you seem to have it out in all details. With Olivier pouring all his menace and disgust into every line and bringing this vile sense of superiority suddenly in his speech of Tindle "not being him". You seemingly see just how much hatred Wyke has on a fundamental level, with the affair but also as a class divide connected to a certain pathos when noting his wife loved him at some point. Caine though is also great in not playing it with any usual dignity of the condemned man rather bringing just the worst kind of sorrow of someone who thinks he's about to die in such seemingly ridiculous circumstances.
Bryan:
That would've been a much better choice.
Tony:
Doomed romance: Vertigo, Elevator to the Gallows, Ashes and Diamonds, Lovers of Montparnasse 19, Rickshaw Man, Madchen in Uniform, The Fly, King Creole
Subterfuge: Vertigo, Touch of Evil, The Hidden Fortress, Murder by Contract, Orders To Kill, Ivan the Terrible Part 2, The Magician, The Bravados, Teacher's Pet, Man of the West, Elevator to the Gallows, The Lineup, Home Before Dark, Ice Cold in Alex, The Horse's Mouth
Shaggy:
#4
Robert:
Hmm, I think if I've seen it usually I'm not nearly as surprised one way or the other, for example I might've said you'd hate the Holdovers, before I saw it, but when I saw it, I instantly thought those who hate Payne will probably at least like this one.
I suppose though Asteroid City, as I suppose I'm baffled by any and all love for it, but that's just me on that one. And also maybe First Man.
Marcus:
Well I will need a clarification, as in the best teachers, or for the quality of the performance? For example Michael Redgrave gives one of the very best performances as a teacher, but Crocker-Harris is a bad teacher.
Louis: And what is your 11-15 for Best Actress 1958.
RIP Joss Ackland
R.I.P. Rosalynn Carter.
Louis: I meant to ask for a list with the quality of performance in mind, I should have clarified.
RIP Rosalynn Carter
Louis: Your thoughts on this video regarding Ozu?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44LMEdHnqqw
Also, just watch the first eighteen seconds of this other video to hear Ozu briefly talk about his writing process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_H1qoUhWd4
RIP Joss Ackland and Rosalynn Carter.
Louis: Your thoughts on these Frasier episodes?
Are You Being Served?
Ask Me No Questions
Door Jam
Also, your thoughts on Dan Butler as Bulldog.
Louis: Who gives your favorite performance in High and Low, Mifune or Yamazaki?
Louis: Your thoughts on WKW's direction and the cinematography of Ashes of Time? I don't remember seeing them.
Always been a fan of the movie but it's hard to justify why. The story is clearer once you read summations of it online, but the editing borders self parody at times.
Louis: The follow-up to Wolf Hall is finally being adapted to the screen.
Louis: Thoughts on this.
https://theplaylist.net/aardman-literally-only-has-enough-clay-for-one-more-film-a-wallace-gromit-film-coming-next-year-20231120/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Louis: Aside from Giants and Toys, also watch this other Naruse movie from 1958, even if you're already watching 1932 movies.
https://ok.ru/video/2052673571438
Louis: What would be your 2020s casts for Watership Down, The Plague Dogs and When The Wind Blows.
I'm a bit lower on Memory it seems than most, in part I didn't love the insistence of the austerity of the directorial choices, and I feel one moment early on involving the start of the central relationship feels like a shocking moment for the sake of it. And while it is perhaps to give credence to a perception of Chastain's character, we never see her act actively paranoid the rest of the film, and her other accusations prove to 100% true, so it's an inclusion I don't think really felt earned by the rest of the narrative or the character. Having said that, the relationship between the woman troubled by her memories, and the man losing his memories, does work, and is well realized. Working both in terms of the mutual sadness but also the mutual affection found between the two. However I do think the other character's reaction to it feels pretty standard if not even cliched at times. Many elements, such as Sarsgaard's daughter feel completely forgotten about, Chastain being overprotective towards her daughter, aren't really resolved, nor do I think the film quite earns a "well life doesn't always resolve itself". The relationship is enough to carry the film however.
Chastain - 4.5
Wever - 3.5
Harper - 4
Fisher - 2.5
Timber - 2.5
Hey everyone. Part two of my previous blog post is up, and it'll probably be my own post for the rest of the week.
Louis: do you go Lead or Supporting for Sarsgaard? And glad to see a 4 for Harper, it was nice to see her get a bigger part and thought she did great with it.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on the opening scene to Mr. Robot?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1z5y8mMi6M&ab_channel=USANetwork
Melissa Berrara has been fired from Scream 7 because she tweeted a pro palestine tweet , like...that has surely killed the franchise right there, what on earth?
RatedRStar: New blacklist about to drop. Good to see we’re still remaking things from the 50’s.
Louis and everyone: Thoughts on the following two scenes from "Mississipi Burning" and "House", respectively?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvy5tDkETfQ&ab_channel=Movieclips
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FC3q-eorBH8&ab_channel=HouseM.D.
The former I think is a solid showing of Hackman's steely, forceful screen presence (also intense work from Rooker and Douriff).
The latter scene might be hard to judge fully due to the editing. That said, I've always found Laurie's "devil may care" style as House amusing - though it would 100% NOT FLY in an actual hospital setting.
RatedRStar: I was checked out of the franchise long before the current conflict (I know "Scream 6" has it's fans...I just couldn't bring myself to watch it).
Robert McFarlane: Makes me wonder what Joesph McCarthy back in the day would have thought about all this.
Louis: Sometimes I wish I was in 1950s America, at least I could watch Whats' My Line every Sunday lol.
Mitchell: Its not necessarily to do with the Scream franchise itself, even though Scream 5 and especially acting wise 6 were actually fine films compared to other franchises that have gone on this long and outstayed their welcome,
Its the fact you could make a pro palestine tweet, which does not make you a Hamas terrorism supporter and get fired for it, it makes you a human rights and ceasefire supporter, thats what its supposed to be anyway.
Anyway its just my opinion.
Louis: I've been looking over my lists and have wondered whether any of these performances could still get upgraded:
Monty Woolley in The Pied Piper
Topol in The Fiddler On The Roof
Terence Stamp in The Limey
Liev Schreiber in Defiance
Bradley Cooper in The Place Beyond The Pines
Those that you've definitely settled on, I would like to take off the list.
I liked Napoleon, however I don't think achieves greatness. The battle scenes are marvellous spectacle, and the general aesthetic is most eye-catching, both things one typically doesn't worry about with Ridley Scott. It's the story that can be the problem, and from this cut at the very least, it rushes through the political career of Napoleon to get to the key moments of military career, leaving little overall context and weakening one's investment. Countering that though is the relationship between him and Josephine, which is quite surprising, but I certainly found it more than a little intriguing its atypical nature. But while I wouldn't call the overall a film a mess, its various parts are put together with very thin strands that make the whole thing stay together, but only just enough. But I did like the overall approach more or less, so I guess bring on the four hour cut, and hopefully the proper cut.
Kirby - 4.5
Rahim - 3
Miles - 3
Needham - 3
Philipponnat - 2.5
Rhys - 3
Everett - 3.5
Mawn - 3
The supporting cast definitely all suffer from the pace, as many just vanish without a word.
Louis: Not surprised about this, I pray the 4 hour cut is gonna be great.
Hold off on cast thoughts until you've seen the performances in full.
Louis: I can see Kirby getting a 5 with the longer cut and what is her category placement for this version.
Louis: In terms of historical scope, how much of Napoleon's life is it covering?
From the trailer, I would surmise it mainly focusses on his miltary career (french revolution - just before Russian invasion), but does it also include physically show his life before/after?
His exile on St. Helena could be an intriguing film by itself; A denounced world leader, forced to spend his remaining days in a semi-prison, regailing visitors with his past exploits while still a bitter egomaniac within - there's cinematic potential in that.
I am actually somewhat surprised by the Napoleon reviews, I wasn't expecting it to get solid reviews, I thought it would get very divisive reviews lol, like a Kingdom of Heaven reception lol.
Going off your response Louis, the DC is looking very promising indeed.
Anyone else getting the urge to rewatch Good Night, and Good Luck for no reason at all?
Matt Mustin: 2005 is probably IMO the worst year in Oscar history, Good Night, and Good Luck is one of the only good films to be fair, including recent events lol.
Marcus:
Note: You have to see them in the teaching setting at some point.
Bryan Cranston - Breaking Bad
Michael Redgrave - The Browning Version
Maggie Smith - The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie
Mads Mikkelsen - The Hunt
Christopher Walken - The Dead Zone
Anne Bancroft - The Miracle Worker
Mads Mikkelsen - Another Round
Joanne Woodward - Rachel Rachel
Michael Stuhlbarg - A Serious Man
Harrison Ford - Raiders of the Lost Ark/Last Crusade
8000's:
The precision of Ozu both pre/post, isn't too surprising given how both specific and precise his films are. As it is hard not to sense that in his films, which have such an exact approach every time. And hearing his approach of using images isn't surprising, as his films are often defined by a key image, and you can easily see how perhaps he worked off of that to then develop his film.
Tony:
Are you Being Served I recall being quite a funny episode for focusing on the neuroticism of the brothers as attached to their mother's note, with the final twist being perfection particularly in the hilarious revelation of it.
Ask Me No Questions, I mainly recall for the fake Maris moment, otherwise the episode was one that was just kind of "fine" as recall.
Door Jam for me is a late great episode, where it remembered to properly pair Frasier and Niles in a completely hilarious situation. This time just in the fixation of the spa, with the finale being one of my favorite moments especially Frasier's "please remain in the relaxation grotto, have crueler words ever been spoken" and of course "YES This is where we belong" as they enter the back alley with bees.
Anonymous:
Well by virtue of the last scene which is one of the best acted scenes, period, Yamazaki, though Mifune is also amazing in that scene.
Anonymous:
Chastain - (Her initial work is quite effective in showing this sort of passive detached state of the character, who just interacts with just enough to get by. Chastain presents her as constantly having this shield about her, in her body language having barely any interaction with others, and even those she does interact with in a very modest, barely outgoing manner. The only minor break with that is with her daughter, however even that Chastain portrays effectively as a warmth that is very guarded, not towards her daughter rather the notion of her becoming associated with others. Her first major scene with Sarsgaard, again I don't think is consistent to overall character written as it is more intense paranoia that we don't see through the rest of the film. She's very effective in the scene however in bringing suddenly and quite bluntly the more vicious trauma the character has gone through. Afterwards Chastain is terrific though in her scenes with Sarsgaard which is a combination of empathy along with giving comfort and taking comfort. There's a real natural quality in their interactions that makes their scenes work together wonderfully well. Though I'll get into this more likely later. Otherwise she has her big scene with Harper, where she brings again the intensity of her outrage and just dissatisfaction powerfully, and again as this fundamental pain within the anger.
Harper - (A well done bit of horribleness by her. Because she successfully puts on the most immediate facade of mothering in the easiest way possible. In terms of being the "loving" grandmother she convincingly puts on the front, even if she has some great moments of cracks where when she does something wrong these is always this narcissistic quality in her performance where she defers blame with the biggest smile on her face and a whole manipulative manner to her work. She's then terrific though in her scene of her full performance in so convincingly portraying every denial and shift towards a bitter insidious blame. I especially loved her final delivery of what was the last denial, as this manner of her being absolutely fixed in her delusion of her perfection against the evidence to the contrary.)
Wever - (As the more put together sister, she gives a decent understated performance where she manages to convey the sense of concern for her sister though combined with a degree of frustration for her state. I don't exactly love what's done with the character towards the end writing wise, particularly the last scene between her and Timber which felt half-conceived however I find Wever's performance delivers well enough.)
Fisher & Timber - (Both I think were underwritten within the scheme of the film, particularly the former where the film just seemed to forget the character existed. I don't think either really created that much of a sense of history with their parental co-stars, and was a weaker aspect of the film to me.)
Calvin:
He felt lead to me, as there's plenty from his perspective and the film does very much feel like the story of both characters, even if Chastain is favored overall.
8000's:
I'm done with 58 viewings for the time being.
Luke:
Well it is about time, may Rylance get that Emmy this time. Although I really hope they recast Richard Rich.
Hmmm...not quit
RatedRStar: I always found it frustrating how Clooney won for a very forgetable performance, despite genuinely proving his talents that same year as a film maker and performer. Though to be fair, the whole direction of "Syriana" seemed to take a hands-off approach (IE lets just film this person - they'll do the rest).
Marcus:
A compelling scene, I'll admit I never sought out the show because pretty much everyone said it derailed. And I'll say Malek seems at his most natural here, though one could argue that maybe he just always seems a bit stiff and awkward on screen, however that completely fits this character. Though one can wonder a chicken and the egg situation, is Malek great in this scene, or do all his weaknesses become strengths with this character?
RatedRStar:
Also you get the rare glimpse of George Clooney being a great director...shame that was a fluke apparently.
Luke:
Well I should probably move Topol to a 4.5. No on Woolley. Probably not on Schreiber and Stamp.
Mitchell:
From the start of his rise to power during the Revolution to his end in exile. Many key moments though are just a quick scene honestly.
Louis: Having seen the first two seasons of Mr. Robot (and having little interest in watching the rest of it), Malek is perfect for that role. He's consistently great even when the show is far from it, and I'd recommend at least watching the first season if you have time for it.
Louis: Your cast and director for a 60's The Killer.
Louis: Could Naomi Watts go up to a 5 for King Kong or at least go up a few places in the 2005 Lead Actress ranking. I was rather surprised you ranked her below Huffman and Theron.
Louis: I understand if you don't want to talk about this, but your thoughts on Susan Sarandon getting dropped by her talent agency and Melissa Barrera being dropped by the Scream franchise?
btw, random question...has anybody here seen Rod Reiner's new documentary about Albert Brooks? It looks quite interesting.
Also saw an interview with the two, and man - they are a funny pair.
Anonymous: I have very strong feelings on that, as I imagine most people do, so not entirely sure if this is the best place for that conversation.
Setting aside the actual content of what they were saying, the consequences they faced are sadly not surprising, even if I would personally argue it's shambolic on every level.
Anonymous: I think the media have misunderstood the situation, in regards to Susan Sarandon and Melissa Barrera, they think Israel is the Hero, and Palestine is the villain, unlike the Ukraine and Russia war where it is that simple, this isn't that simple.
Look, things might change, lets wait and see in regards to Susan and Melissa.
Louis: Anyway subject change, regarding 2005, I thought Munich was an OK film, do you think that it would have been better had it been about the actual 1972 Olympic bombings, rather than the aftermath, I feel that the suspense could have been truly great?.
Tahmeed:
Perhaps at some point.
8000's:
The Killer 1960's directed by Michael Powell:
The Killer: Richard Burton
The Lawyer: Brock Peters
Dolores: Moira Shearer
The Brute: Mike Mazurki
The Expert: Kathleen Byron
The Client: Joe E. Brown
Thomas:
I mean it's been a long time, so who knows.
Anonymous:
I'd rather not get into, it is an important issue to be sure, but there are many alternative avenues to have such discussions. I will just say I do believe in freedom of speech, and leave it at that.
RatedRStar:
That's one that I don't think Spielberg would've ever made, given how it ends, though a compelling film I'm sure could be made out of it.
Louis: As someone mentioned High and Low, what would you make of a 2020s adaptation with Hidetoshi Nishijima and Masaki Okada in Mifune and Yamazaki's roles?
I'm of a similar mind as Tahmeed. People should have a platform to openly, civily talk about current issues. I'm just not sure a blog dedicated to films/actors is that platform.
As for the various celebrity comments and mishaps...well, politics have always been a delicate thing for talent agencies. The blunt reality is that when famous people say something, thousands or millions of others hear it. As such, freedom of speech still applies to them but so does the responsibility of knowing what they say/how it will be percieved.
Louis: Your thoughts on Dan Butler as Bulldog?
In terms of lighter recent news, what do you think of Skyler Gisondo being cast as Jimmy Olsen?
8000's:
Definitely can see Okada, I'd say maybe someone more innately intense in presence though for Gondo.
Tony:
Butler - (Always quite good in his overall more comedic presence as the most macho extreme man versus milquetoast Frasier, and his way of playing off of them. What works so well about his performance is how really overt he is in his energy that is explosive in a different way from Grammer, that blends in ideally as a pseudo antagonist. When pushed comedically he was always ready to play, such as his more comical way of breaking down when Frasier has to be built up after he gets dumped by a woman. But, he's also quite good in the scene where he pledges his genuine love to Roz, and tries to back peddle it to save face. He's honestly moving in showing Bulldog's vulnerability, and successfully grants the depth to a largely overt character, without breaking the character either.)
Great casting choice honestly, looks right out of the comic, hopefully he doesn't get immediately shot in the face.
Louis: Thoughts on Leon Shamroy and Masao Tamai's work in The Bravados and Summer Clouds, respectively.
Louis: Your thoughts on Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor.
8000's:
There's occasionally a stylish shot, usually involving shadows, in The Bravados, but mostly it looks like any old color western from the period. Not poorly shot, but not distinctive within the genre at the time. The use of color isn't really exploited fully, honestly the colors more distract from the images at the time, and give the nature of the story I think black and white probably would've been more fitting.
Summer Clouds has some beautiful shots of the countryside, and occasionally a nice moody shot in the interior, however a bit of it for suffered in comparison to Ozu. As you see just the way Naruse shoots waist up, rather than floor up, does remove a certain intimacy of the setting. But regardless, the composition and framing, is nicely handled overall, and again some eye catching exteriors. Although each of these elements aren't overly distinctive, in terms of specific shots or lighting consistently.
Tony:
Excellent choice, and the type of role Hoult should be in for a big budget films. Hope its a juicy Luthor role because it could be an ideal part for Hoult.
Louis: Hiroyuki Canada would probably make for a great Gondo. Nishijima would be a better fit for Inspector Tokura.
Calvin:
Big yes on Sanada, and I agree that Nishijima would be a better fit for Tokura.
Just wanted to chime in regarding Mr. Robot, of which I watched the first season and a couple of episodes of season 2 back in the pandemic (meaning I can't remember about 90% of it nowadays). Malek is great, for sure.
Louis: Which of these performances could still get upgraded or you're firmly settled on. Again, want to take some off the list:
Tyrone Power in Nightmare Alley
John Garfield in Body And Soul
Takashi Shimura in Scandal
Raymond Massey in East Of Eden
Takashi Shimura in I Live In Fear
Burt Reynolds in The Longest Yard
Klaus Kinski in Nosferatu The Vampire
Klaus Maria Brandauer n Mephisto
Om Puri in East Is East
Russell Crowe in Gladiator
Paul Newman in Road To Perdition
Michael Gambon in The Half-Blood Prince
Bradley Cooper in The Place Beyond The Pines
Joaquín Cosío in The Perfect Dictatorship
Rachel McAdams in Spotlght
Louis: Do you still intend to watch Wish before the end of the 2023 reviews. Despite its reviews, it's Disney's best looking film in quite some time.
Your updated Oscar predictions and your reasons why.
Luke:
None of those performances will be raised up to a 5.
I'll probably see Wish at some point...not anytime soon.
Picture:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
The Holdovers
Poor Things
Killers of the Flower Moon
Anatomy of a Fall
Barbie
The Color Purple
American Fiction
Maestro
Past Lives
Oppenheimer, The Holdovers, Poor Things, Killers, seem all pretty easy to predict as each having the praise and really in different tastes to a degree. Barbie I think will get in regardless, however I do think it could be like Top Gun Maverick, where it could perform well yet still underperform in ways at the same time. Sticking with Anatomy as the foreign leap, particularly since so much is in English anyways, and pretty digestible. The Color Purple initial reactions, while I bet reviews will temper a bit in comparison, is enough to predict it in the bottom half. American Fiction has a bad campaigner, but I think is getting enough praise in the right places. Maestro is helped by being Netflix's potential top priority, but I will say the reviews, while largely positive, do suggest it has some weakness, which I will get to more of in a moment. Past Lives, I'm holding onto, but I will need some resurgence with the critics to remind the academy.
Director:
Christopher Nolan - Oppenheimer (Winner)
Yorgos Lanthimos - Poor Things
Martin Scorsese - Killers of the Flower Moon
Alexander Payne - The Holdovers
Justine Triet - Anatomy of a Fall
I think even if Oppenheimer falls victim of the preferential ballot in picture, this is aligning to be Nolan's year finally. Lanthimos actually wasn't a slam dunk for the Favourite, so I do think is room for doubt, but I think directors go for him still. Scorsese seems safe, but there are enough general reservations for the film that it will keep him from win number 2. Really Payne's most "directed" film in some ways, so if they're welcoming him back in general, I think he definitely gets in. The foreign contender, is typically fifth (I'm sure Berger was sixth) so Triet fits well into that.
Actor:
Bradley Cooper - Maestro (Winner)
Cillian Murphy - Oppenheimer
Leonardo DiCaprio - Killers of the Flower Moon
Paul Giamatti - The Holdovers
Jeffrey Wright - American Fiction
I actually do think Cooper could fall off like he did for A Star is Born after being presumed the winner for that. BUT, I think only Murphy can stop him by virtue of the natural boon you get for playing a famous person. DiCaprio is DiCaprio, but I don't think he has a chance of winning based on the nature of the role however I won't doubt him for a nomination. If he was going against other fictional characters, I think Giamatti would have more of a chance to win but I think he definitely gets in if Holdovers is doing well overall. Fifth is tough, going with Wright just because he's in a presumed best picture nominee, and he's certainly well respected. I could easily switch to Domingo or Scott though.
Actress:
Lily Gladstone - Killers of the Flower Moon (Winner)
Emma Stone - Poor Things
Carey Mulligan - Maestro
Fantasia Barrino - The Color Purple
Sandra Huller - Anatomy of a Fall
Gladstone has such a strong narrative and praise that it seems unlikely she'll miss. Stone seems like Blanchett last year, and I think if critics go all in her, and she plays the game, she could win again. Mulligan I don't think is a lock, but if Cooper's winning it seems like she's getting in given she's gotten more praise overall. Barrino seems obvious if Purple is in picture. Huller cannot be a lock, but if they embrace Anatomy it is hard not to check her name off for it.
Supporting Actor:
Robert Downey Jr. - Oppenheimer (Winner)
Ryan Gosling - Barbie
Mark Ruffalo - Poor Things
Robert De Niro - Killers of the Flower Moon
Dominic Sessa - The Holdovers
I think the top four are obvious at this venture at least, all in powerful films, all extremely well praised, all respected. Going with Sessa now, just hard to see him being ignored completely if the film is in the top five, he has the toughest road, but I can see him being a Lucas Hedges, even if he's definitely co-lead.
Supporting Actress:
Danielle Brooks - The Color Purple (Winner)
Da'Vine Joy Randolph - The Holdovers
Taraji P. Henson - The Color Purple
Jodie Foster - Nyad
Emily Blunt - Oppenheimer
Brooks in the early word is getting all the praise, so easy enough to see her to join other Tony to Oscar winners. Randolph (who I'd move up to a 4.5 on re-watch personally), can win as well, but a nomination seems easy enough. Henson does seem on shakier ground but seems like an easiest enough choice at this venture. Definitely a little personal bias on my part in predicting Foster, but Netflix ought to get someone in, and she's who most come away talking about from that film. Blunt, sure, though I do think Oppenheimer must perform at its apex for that.
Will do screenplay/techs in a little bit.
Louis: Regarding your list of the top 5 Ebert reviews, were you referring to the contemporaneous reviews of Bonnie & Clyde, Raging Bull, and Hoop Dreams, or the Great Movies essays on them?
Also, how do you think Siskel & Ebert differed in terms of their approaches to film?
Adapted Screenplay:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
Killers of the Flower Moon
Poor Things
Barbie
American Fiction
If it's my best picture predictions this seems an easy set, and yes I don't believe the academy will buy Barbie in original nonsense (at least I hope, as that would set a bad precedent).
Original Screenplay:
The Holdovers (Winner)
Anatomy of a Fall
Maestro
Past Lives
May December
Best picture nominees again, and I guess May December. But I could see many a dark horse take the fifth spot, or the fourth spot if Past Lives loses all momentum.
Cinematography:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
Killers of the Flower Moon
Poor Things
Maestro
The Color Purple
All are flashy, previously nominated cinematographers, no reason to doubt any. I do think Zal/Zone of Interest is a possible spoiler even if Zone of Interest is a limited player overall.
Costumes:
Barbie (Winner)
Poor Things
Killers of the Flower Moon
The Color Purple
Wonka
Top four seem easy. Wonka seems like a possible fifth with the amount/creativity of the costumes, though I think Napoleon, Oppenheimer or Priscilla, *could* show up.
Editing:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
Killers of the Flower Moon
Poor Things
Maestro
The Holdovers
All have a certain "flash" from my understanding or pedigree in the top four. Often at least one film the academy just loves gets in here even without flashy editing, and that's The Holdover spot.
Makeup & Hair-styling:
Poor Things (Winner)
Maestro
Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 3
Barbie
Nyad
I'm quite surprised by Poor Things being low in many predictions in this category, as I would think Dafoe's appearance alone would guarantee this. Maestro is the point of controversy but still transformation/age, is an easy sell. Guardians has a ton of it, so you think it would be rewarded. Barbie again has plenty of flash if slightly less intense. Nyad's I'll admit I was quite impressed by as Bening's face just looked genuinely messed up, so I think it could make it.
Production Design:
Barbie (Winner)
Poor Things
Oppenheimer
Killers of the Flower Moon
The Color Purple
Hard to see one missing out just by the potential strengths of the films to back them up, combined with how showy all of them seem to be. Additionally the academy will ignore Anderson and Scott in all categories, if they're already set on ignoring them.
Score:
Bake off will likely prove me wrong.
Oppenheimer (Winner)
Poor Things
Killers of the Flower Moon
The Zone of Interest
The Killer
Oppenheimer is a no duh. Killers is a chance to posthumously recognize Robertson, and it is perhaps the one time he won't be disqualified for working with Scorsese. Even if Zone is mostly ignored, the branch seems to love Levi. Going on a limb with The Killer, but Reznor/Ross have the pedigree, and it's a score that stands out.
With the backlog coming next month, these are my suggestions:
Utpal Dutt in Agantuk
Alan Cumming in Josie And The Pussycats
Leland Orser in Faults
Tatsuya Nakadai in Kill! (I think this is the last remaining 4.5 from completed rounds that could still go up)
Laurence Fishburne and Jeff Goldblum in Deep Cover (Goldblum for the prediction contest)
Song:
"I'm Just Ken" - Barbie (Winner)
"What Was I Made For" - Barbie
"Wish" - Wish
"Keep It Movin'" - The Color Purple
"Road to Freedom" - Rustin
I was quite disturbed when it was apparent that WB wasn't pushing "I'm Just Ken" at first, thankfully now they're pushing both it and "What Was I Made For". I think both get in. Wish isn't apparently knocking people's socks off, but the academy loves their Disney songs. The Color Purple's new song sure, though the academy will call BS, sometimes on "let's get an Oscar" songs, however precedent says to predict it. I don't think there's any crappy Diane Warren songs to get nominated, so the Rustin song, why not.
Sound:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
The Color Purple
Maestro
Killers of the Flower Moon
Napoleon
If the academy can nominate best picture nominees in the category they do, and all four seem easy enough fits...though I think Killers can miss here. Napoleon definitely has all the sounds with the battles, so sure why not.
Visual Effects:
Oppenheimer (Winner)
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
Poor Things
Napoleon
The Creator
Oppenheimer has a great narrative with "all practical", Guardians has a lot and actually was a lot better than many recent Marvel efforts, so I think it gets in. Poor Things by virtue, of if the academy can nominate a best picture nominee they often do. Napoleon, because that does have quite the scope, so sure. The Creator is garbage, but the visuals were good technically speaking, so why not.
Animated Feature:
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Winner)
The Boy and the Heron
Elemental
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem
Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget
Sounds like Wish won't happen, so Elemental will fill that spot. Spider-man and Heron seem very safe. Turtles has all the praise so I think so. And Chicken Run, sure as long as it gets the reviews, as the academy usually likes Aardman. The Academy typically ignores Illumination so I think they'll probably ignore Mario despite its box office.
Tony:
The contemporary reviews, I didn't consider his great films essays, which I think are separate.
I actually don't think they differed all *that* much despite the intensity of their disagreements at times, as when they agreed or disagreed together the ease of their conversations shows how they were in a similar frame of mind, as both would praise, story, technique, character and theme. They often worked with each other voices, and not that they were carbon copies but they were both very talented at articulating their praise or dismay.
In the disagreements though, I think Siskel and Ebert had their favored directors, and would go to bat for them separately more fervently, like Siskel for Kubirck (Full Metal Jacket), Ebert for Scorsese (Casino). But also Siskel tended to want the film to be something and if it failed to achieve that intention he was more critical of it. Where Ebert would more often fall into taking the intention of the piece and praise if it met even a perceived lower standard. However Ebert also would more often throw a whole film out for a single element, which was less typical for Siskel, like giving Die Hard a negative review essentially for Paul Gleason's character.
Guardians should be guaranteed a makeup nom just for the villain honestly.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on this anime opening sequence? The show it's from is simply delightful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoQfJjaoGLk&ab_channel=CrunchyrollCollection
Louis: Your thoughts on these clips of an 80's Ozu documentary?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCjmMQLSlks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX22Cqxmp10
Hello guys and Louis, I came across the blog a few months ago and I'm pleased to have found a site that values all opinions without getting abuse from trolls such as on Film Twitter or World Of Reel. I've really enjoyed all your reviews and thoughts on individual elements of films aside from acting which is what this blog is primarily about. I look forward to bringing some input to topics in the near future and beyond.
Jonathan: Welcome to the family. I've browsed World Of Reel quite a few times in the past and the comment section there is beyond toxic. Majority of the readers there are douchebags. I do think Jordan Ruimy (the owner) is go to when it comes to breaking the news first.
I'm mentally preparing myself to get Farewell'ed (though I do think critics will rally behind it more, hopefully) so I'll try not to be too pissy about it missing out on things, but I will be annoyed if, for example, Barbie takes up a spot in Original Screenplay and Past Lives misses out.
Jonathan: And I look forward to your opinions. Fair warning, you'll have difficulty asking questions that haven't already been answered so if your looking for any info in particular, try site:actoroscar.blogspot.com insert keyword and you should find what you are looking for.
Luke: Thank you for the heads up and couldn't agree more on World Of Reel.
Calvin: your ratings for the casts of the new Hunger Games, Mutt, and Anatomy Of A Fall?
Speaking of Mutt, i watched that movie recently. One of the most underrated films of the year. It’s on Netflix if you guys would like to check it out
Lio Mehiel - 4.5
Cole Doman - 4
Mimi Ryder - 4
Alejandro Goic - 4
Also went to an early screening of Maestro last night. Found it to be pretty meh altogether.
Bradley Cooper - 4 (had some iffy spots, but found it a rock solid effort regardless)
Carey Mulligan - 3.5 (the writing does no justice to her character, but she definitely makes the most out of it)
Matt Bomer - 2.5
Maya Hawke - 2
Sarah Silverman - 1.5
Hunger Games
Blyth - 4.5/5
Zegler - 4
Rivera - 3.5
Davis - 4/4.5
Dinklage - 4
Schwartzman - 2.5/3
Schafer - 3.5
Mutt
Mehiel - 4
Doman - 4
Ryder - 4
Goic - 4
Anatomy of a Fall
Hüller - 5
Arlaud - 4
Machado-Graner - 4
Reinartz - 4
I’m surprised I’m bigger on Machado-Graner than the rest of you. I feel like he was one of the easiest 5’s I’ve given out this year.
Louis: Your thoughts on the use of classical music in 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon.
Louis: Your thoughts on 'Fairytale' from Shrek and these 2 scenes.
Farquaad interrogates the Gingerbread Man
'Hallelujah'
Luke: I dunno, Ruimy isn't much of a reliable source at all, from my experience.
Jonathan: Welcome to the site.
Louis: Your thoughts on Fargo's The Tragedy of the Commons, if you've seen it.
Tony: Fair, I'm a bit biased since he broke the Napoleon Director's Cut news before anyone else did.
Thank you Tony.
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone who celebrates.
Louis: Your thoughts on these three Breaking Bad scenes?
https://youtu.be/NvbnWaD_EcU?si=u6jCknWItAGhSlBh
'You brought a meth lab to the airport?!'
'You brought a bomb into a hospital?!'
Louis and everyone: This sort of got swallowed up with the older comments, but thoughts on these two scenes from "Mississipi Burning"? I fully see your take on 88's best actor race, Louis; Most every nominee is solid/good, but Hackman has some truly strong moments in his performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvy5tDkETfQ&ab_channel=Movieclips
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ovQhqQy7bE&ab_channel=Movieclips
Mitchell: He does what he can with some really trashy material, but I fail to see the greatness of the performance. He plays the role as written, as well as anyone possibly can, but where’s the meat? The character is a well-worn archetype that he doesn’t actually shed. It’s well-played, but there’s nothing in Hackman’s approach that raises the role beyond just that. He’s done better both before and after. I’ll grant that he’s better than Hoffman (my least favorite win for Actor), but in a year that could have given us Irons, Hoskins, or Malkovich, it’s paltry work in comparison.
Tahmeed:
For the lack of a better word, some adorable imagery there I will say, and a charming little upbeat tune to back it up. As per usual, have little idea of what is going on based on it, but nice looking/sounding intro.
8000's:
The first clip is a charming little story, and to hear Ozu's personality wasn't too surprising. The second is a quietly powerful bit of writing from Ozu, again not too surprising.
Johnathan Williams:
Welcome.
Each time is a bit different. In 2001, the substantial uses are "Also sprach Zaarathustra" and "The Blue Danube", and feels naturally befitting to the idea of the advancement of humankind by scoring them with great human achievements in terms of the pieces of classical music. The former being the grandest of the grandiose of being the initial advancement, however the cut to immediately "Blue" changes the emphasis to a kind of grace and ease of the later development as the technology just becomes seemingly part of humankind.
Where the former would have not been a more "elevated" ambition, Kubrick I suppose immediately subverts that by using Beethoven as the music of a wretched degenerate and as the theme for the torture of said degenerate. Both in this instance seem to denigrate the music, as now rather the scoring of human evolution, essentially the complete opposite, though as effective in making this point.
Barry Lyndon's use is the masterstroke of the film, in kind of being the bow on the entire concept of transporting to period, by scoring the film through what would've been contemporary, though brought to life as dynamically as possible in terms of arrangement and performance, however crafting what would be the music Barry would be "backed" by in reality of the time.
I'll give thoughts on how previously existing songs are used, but don't give thoughts on the songs themselves, just as I don't want to broach those floodgates. Anyway, I always found the gingerbread man scene one of the better scene, and to me better exploited the idea of the subversion of the fairy tale by playing into it in Farquaad playing into the rhymes while also going about the torture.
Less crazy about "Hallelujah" as let's throw a popular song over it within the early 2000's animated films was not the approach I loved, and the montage work here I find to be just "fine". Additionally the animated film trope, of let's sulk in our corners before the third act, is something that unless done perfectly is a bit tired, and this was not done perfectly.
Tony:
Didn't love the episode, I thought everyone was acting way too broadly, even for Fargo, except Temple and Morris, and it failed to really pull me into it as every other season opening has. I'll say the action was done well, though the stupidity of the men was a bit much (I mean why wouldn't they tie up Temple more, or at least child lock the back doors to their car?), but I didn't really care. I'll give the next episode a chance, but I was a bit "eh" while watching this one.
Mitchell:
Hearing any Hackman performance being called "paltry" even in comparison is a Batsignal for me. But I don't really have much to add to my original review. It's a good "meat and potatoes" performance from him in a somewhat underwritten role, as his and Dafoe's dynamic isn't quite there, and the whole I idea of his background as a southern Sheriff needed more to it. However, Hackman makes everything that he does look easy, but not because it was easy, but because he's Gene Hackman and is an amazing actor. Other than maybe Robert Duvall, I doubt anyone would have made the part look as easy, in terms of the menace, the intensity and bringing out any depth that can be mined (The McDormand relationship doesn't quite work but Hackman brings genuine emotion there, and the same is for the scene where he describes his father's racism, again a concept that I think needed more in terms of the character's background but Hackman's delivery of that scene does find more meat than most, eh I'll say any, actor could've found with it and made it look as easy. Having said that, there were indeed greater turns that year, hence why he doesn't make my top ten.
Marcus:
The first scene is a fascinating scene to look at after the series as a whole, because initially you take it as a scene showing just the point of desperation and really the end of the rope that Walt is in. You believe him when he says "he never had any choice", but what we learn later about Gray Matter even is that's probably not the truth. And what this scene though in itself is that Walt ends up merging choices as he does the chemo, but instead of marking time, he does the most horrible thing to "be alive" in becoming the drug kingpin.
Hilarious moment that is always hard to remember how light their dynamic was at times, in the comedy so natural in just how ramshackle the operation was, with Jesse then the idiot and Walt basically the constantly frustrated teacher still.
Probably one of few moments of levity in what was one of the tense portions of the show, particularly when watching it contemporaneously. And hilarious in the simplicity of the call back by pointing out the insanity of where Jesse and Walt are in the moment, without at all breaking the tension. Although now the positions revered.
Louis: Your thoughts on Ozu's voice judging from that video where you hear him describe his writing process.
Thank you Louis.
I knew "paltry" would get you. I'm getting good at this.
Louis: This is one of few places on the internet where you can say anything without incurring the wrath of Shrek fans, so I'd be happy to learn your opinion on Fairytale if you don't mind.
Saw Saltburn, overall I quite enjoyed it, the ensemble is quite strong even though a couple of the supporting performances didn’t work for me. Keoghan is fantastic.
Thoughts on 'Fairytale' Louis.
Louis and anyone else who’s seen Napoleon: Would you recommend just waiting for the Director’s Cut of Napoleon and watch that instead? The fact that there’s going to be a better (I’m guessing) version of the film later on is deterring me from watching the cut that’s already out tbh.
Bryan: I'm waiting for it as well. I don't think it's fair to give judgment on a film that's clearly truncated in it's current form.
I was unfortunately disappointed by Saltburn, visually stylish, there are individual scenes I liked, but overall, I found on the line between homage and derivative it fell closer to the latter again, and again. The film seems to think two revelations in it are going to be surprising, and rests much of its impact on them, however I found both quite obvious and predictable. If there was more depth, more wit, to the rest, I might've not cared. However, I found the whole culture/class clash was explored in a fairly rudimentary and rote fashion. Nothing in it finds any great insight, nor is it ever terribly surprising. The characters have potential, however I feel like they're all part of ideas for the most part, and could've been so much more.
I will save Keoghan though.
Elordi - 3.5
Pike - 4
Grant - 3.5
Oliver - 4
Madekwe - 2
Mulligan - 3
Rhys - 3
Mitchell - 3
Louis: Unless there are major spoilers involved, thoughts on the cast.
Luke: I feel like I’d constantly be thinking “Ahh, they’re probably going to expand on that in the Director’s Cut” if I watch the Theatrical cut now.
Louis: Aside from Nakadai in Kill!, is Eric Bogosian in Talk Radio a possible backlog review.
Regarding 88 best actor lineup discussion that Rob and Mitchell were having, my favorite there is actually Hanks in Big. Really love that performance. Irons is my overall win though.
And maybe Ewan McGregor in The Ghost Writer (Strongest 4.5 in 2010 Lead and is still his career best). I'm thinking of requesting him for a review down the track because I rather feel that the opportunity will never be there to get a 5 rating in his career.
Last comment was mine sorry, pressed the anonymous button without knowing.
Saltburn was stupid as fuck. I was impressed with Elordi and Oliver, but I thought Keoghan was telegraphed and shaky after a certain point.
Perfectionist: Out of the actual nominees, I've seen everyone but Sydow. Hackman is an easy choice for me out of those four, but I still like Olmos, Hanks and even Hoffman to varying degrees.
The overall year, however, is one I've really been sleeping on (Apologies to Irons and Malkovich).
I watched Napoleon, but can't really give any thoughts on it because my sleep-deprived dumbass dozed off for about an hour during it. All I can say is that you can really tell the whole thing is rushed and is a 2 and half hour version of a much longer movie.
Also, fwiw, Kirby was making the strongest impression in me.
Bryan:
I'd probably just wait and see if the 4 hour cut is considered better.
Luke:
Difficult without giving something away for most, though the more I think about the film, the less and less I like it.
Louis: Your thoughts on the three aforementioned Ebert reviews.
Tony:
Well all I can say all three are brilliantly articulated forms of passion. Ebert in each review manages to not just describe what he likes about it, but more so what he experienced within each film. How he felt within each film, and he so well shares his experience almost to the point of an empathetic reaction from reading it. You may not feel the same way about the film, but you more than understand Ebert's reaction, you feel them. Each though also are great pinpoints in each phase of Ebert, Bonnie and Clyde being the passion of the young reviewer ready to praise his first masterpiece as a reviewer, Raging Bull in the middle ground of full coming into his own, and then in Hoop Dreams, the critic who takes an even further path to create an even greater reflection in the reviews of someone who has done it for decades at that point.
Louis: Since Ebert practically redefined both American film criticism on both print and TV, which medium do you think he was slightly greater at?
Marcus:
Print. He and Siskel together is what made their TV film criticism great, as evidenced by when Ebert had lesser partners later on, it just wasn't the same.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on 10:05 to 12:20 of this video?
https://youtu.be/ot_V7Q8a6yc?si=9v5aqXT4PVzAHmSv
Fennell, along with Zeller (The Son) and Zhao (Eternals) is another filmmaker who reached her peak in 2020 and then stumbled tragically in the next film. Will Lee Isaac Chung suffer the same fate with Twisters?
PS: Fincher must be laughing out loud in their faces.
Louis: Your thoughts on this interview about the Siskel & Ebert book? https://thereveal.substack.com/p/interview-matt-singer-on-opposable
And this article about the duo? https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/siskel-ebert-and-the-secret-of-criticism
Louis: Your cast & director for…
1970s The Killer
1970s The Holdovers
1990s Rustin
You still saving Keoghan?
I guess he's getting a 4.
Louis: Who are the 5 most overrated performers under the age of 40.
Tony:
I mean everything referenced in the interview I'm familiar with, but a good articulation regardless of the appeal of the two, the growth of the two and what their reviews did deliver successfully.
Robert:
Nah, though I have seen some placing him as a dark horse contender for a nomination in best actor, but I don't really see it.
Bryan:
1970's The Killer directed by Brian De Palma:
The Killer: Robert Shaw
The Expert: Geraldine Fitzgerald
The Lawyer: Woody Strode
The Client: Ralph Bellamy
Dolores: Hilary Mason
The Brute: Richard Kiel
1970's The Holdovers directed by Billy Wilder:
Paul Hunham: Walter Matthau
Angus Tully: Keith Carradine
Mary Lamb: Marla Gibbs
1990's Rustin directed by John Singleton:
Rustin: Paul Winfield
Martin Luther King: Clarke Peters
Roy Wilkins: John Amos
Adam Powell Jr.: Delroy Lindo
Jonathan:
I'm not really a big fan of the term overrated, but here's five performers who I've personally not seen their level of talent match their level of exposure/recognition fully.
Keira Knightley (and it is easy to forget how young she is actually, given how long she's been around at this point.)
Finn Wolfhard
John David Washington
Tye Sheridan
Logan Lerman
But hey, always ready for an actor to turn around, I might've put Dev Patel on such a list a decade ago, now I'm genuinely excited when he's in something.
You're still wrong about Keira.
The rest I can't argue with.
Louis: With the "good articulation" part are you referring to the interview or the New Yorker article?
Tony:
The interview, I wasn't able to read the article without a New Yorker subscription.
I'd find it pretty funny if something like Bend it Like Beckham ends up being Louis's favorite Knightley performance.
Tahmeed: Would have the same energy as me thinking Inception is Hardy's second best after The Drop, so I guess we're even.
Mitchell: Not sure if you're already aware of this, but if you haven't, let me just tell you that Spider-Man always holds back his strength when fighting bad guys. If he didn't hold back, Spidey could kill a normal bad guy with one punch.
Louis: Who are the 5 most underrated performers under the age of 40.
Louis: thoughts on the scene in Judgement at Nuremberg where Widmark’s character shows the clips of the camps to the court and the subsequent scene after with the judges discussing it?
Jonathan Williams:
Jena Malone
Harry Melling
Lewis Pullman
Alden Ehrenreich
Margaret Qualley
Mia Goth just fell off the list, after being properly recognized for her work by many last year.
Anonymous:
A scene technically of its time as a way to show real footage of the Holocaust naturally to audiences in a widespread fashion. It works though in context of the film, without feeling exploitative, by presenting all of the legal grey areas Rolfe is trying to utilize don't really matter when you see the blunt and real result of what the judges were complicit in. And you see that it probably all Widmark's character needed to show to crush Rolfe's defense. And it's great acting by Schell because you see just how even Rolfe is taken aback by the footage, and essentially has to work up towards his defense of trying obfuscate the idea of guilt to either those directly responsible or blame everyone.
Louis: For Best Original Score 88 and 93, where would you rank Grave Of The Fireflies and The Nightmare Before Christmas respectively.
And could you rank the types of animation (Hand-Drawn, Stop-Motion, Computer-Generated etc) from favourite to least favourite with your reasons why for each.
8000s: Not sure where I've mentioned that before, but yes...that's 100% correct for a character whose stopped speeding trains, and fights on par with Venom and Rhino. You could make that argument for most superpowered heroes, I think. Hell...one of Superman's big struggles is never being able unleash his full strength, lest the earth itself be anihilated.
Louis: No problem, could you take a look at this archived version of the article instead? You'd likely be familiar with most of the information laid out in the first half, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts on the article's analysis of Siskel and Ebert's approach and film criticism in general: https://archive.is/Jbyo6
Luke:
Both #6.
1. Hand drawn
2. Stop Motion
3. Computer Generated
Computer Generated is getting better thanks to the influence of Spider-Verse, but it is the medium that dates the fastest, and the general aesthetic is least interesting/even adaptable. Even more so, I find mediocre and bad CGI to be the most aggressively dull and the least tolerable. The period where CGI reigned exclusively in the 00's, also corresponds to so much disposable films, that other than a few select efforts no one is nostalgic for, for a reason.
Stop Motion I will say is perhaps slightly limited in that if one is doing stop motion, it has to work within certain styles of storytelling, as it's never going to be realistic for example, per its nature. However, contrasting that it is singular in a way that has its appeal within itself, that makes it unique in a way that no other form can match nor deliver on as is. And there is even something specifically visceral in seeing the best stop motion, because all of it "exists" and there is a nearly subconscious thrill in watching it.
Hand drawn is an easy choice because there is so much one can do with it, in so many different ways, styles and choices. You can make a completely realistic film hand drawn, you can do the craziest adventure, and you can do it in so many different ways from top to bottom. There is no limit to choices with hand drawn in terms of ambition, Loving Vincent, Spirited Away, Pinocchio, The Plague Dogs, all the same technical form but couldn't be more different all the same.
Tony:
I think it speaks accurately to essentially their appeal within the idea of film criticism, because as articulate as the two could be, they were always approachable and practical in their film criticism. As the two typically never forgot that easy question of "is it worth watching" which can be lost sometimes when one approaches film criticism by subtext/meaning first. And I think the article managed to tie that into their beginnings as critics coming out of non-critic positions quite artfully. And I think in general that is what made them popular, along with the competitive nature of their chemistry the article also mentions, because even when talking about the most "prestigious" effort by a filmmaker they still came at it with the sense of film goer, even if they could develop their thoughts as a proper critic.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on the opening/initial betrayal in Rustin? It slightly bothered me that the film heavy-handedly absolves King of the responsibility of making amends with Rustin, as I think mining those moments would have led to something pretty interesting.
Louis: Assuming you have no intention of watching Omen III (1981) and Ironclad (2011), can I have your thoughts on these scenes.
youtube.com/watch?v=_eziTO6rBI8&pp=ygUSdGhlIG9tZW4gaWlpIHNjZW5l
youtube.com/watch?v=9lNlRNV9trQ&pp=ygUSdGhlIG9tZW4gaWlpIHNjZW5l
youtube.com/watch?v=ekCByuXIGr8&pp=ygUPaXJvbmNsYWQgc2NlbmUg
Louis: Your thoughts on Siskel's "actors' lunch" test, and would you say most films you don't give a pass to generally fail this test? Or would you agree with Richard Brody in that it would depend on who's directing the footage?
Also, your top 5 films since 2013 that you'd most like to see a hypothetical Siskel & Ebert conversation on.
Louis: Your thoughts on the Bear attack scene in The Fox and The Hound.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5f7pv9bU-M&pp=ygUhdGhlIGZveCBhbmQgdGhlIGhvdW5kIGJlYXIgYXR0YWNr
Wish is bad. Every story beat unearned. Every song unmemorable. Every side character a pest. Internal logic straight from Kingdom Hearts. They even bungled the execution of making the villain irredeemable.
I can sleep soundly with knowledge that Disney has flopped once again.
I also watched Wish on a night where I was picking seemingly bad movies to watch. A great choice I must say. Jesus Christ, Disney is the shits. I think I'll skip on Marvels after watching this soulless cashgrab(that isn't grabbing much cash). Absolutely horrible writing and bad music, We get Disney leaning into referencing better movies again. Eye-rolling to see characters like the goat from Zootopia here. This is the cheapness we're dealing with,
Tahmeed:
The opening actually got me thinking that the film might be more than the trailer suggested, despite Rock being clearly out of his depth acting wise, but it's a false start that doesn't really go anywhere properly, including the use of King, which it just kind of hand waves in terms of the initial betrayal.
Luke:
Neill gives it his all, delivering his lines like a great Shakespearean monologue, however it was clearly not written Shakespeare, as it is kind of blathering nonsense, but kudos to Neill for the conviction. Although weakened a bit by the dull visual of the dark room, and him just kind of wandering around, with the statue of Christ just kind of there. I can kind of see the idea the scene was going for, but other than Neill, it doesn't work.
The second scene is similar, again Neill's giving it his evil all, the speech though feels repetitive and almost silly because of its repetitiveness. The sound design of the echo of Neill's vice diminishes it. The crowd shots too diminished by the dumb light passing by. Even the crowd's response, which actually is creepy at first, comes off as kind of dumb once they start rapidly repeating it, as in unison it sounded eerie, separately started to sound sloppy.
I'm sensing again the lack of greatness by the camerawork, but that was some out of context strong work by Giamatti. One that he didn't seem completely out of place to begin with, given he's such a modern and distinctly American actor. He's convincing even when going toe to toe with Brian Cox, who you would expect in such a role, in terms of presence however also quite captivating in presenting John's petulance combined with threat but also vulnerability, as the man so adamantly needing to prove himself he does so only with terror.
Tony:
Not one that I quite agree with as I don't think it accounts for ambitious failures, which typically aren't boring but are bad. Also not everyone who makes films is necessarily interesting, sometimes why their films are not, so maybe their film is boring and they're boring too. Could happen.
The Irishman
Parasite
Batman v. Superman
Phantom Thread
Collateral Beauty
Jonathan Williams:
A genuinely intense scene, in part just how evil they drew the bear, but through the pacing of the sequence where the danger is ever present for every character in the fight, particularly the split moments in the attack, including the key emotional one, which wholly works, of Tod coming back to help. And while I think the animation of the period is a few notches below peak Disney of any era, there's some nice touches around the waterfall, in terms of the sound design and the condensation from the water that work rather nicely.
Post a Comment