John Gielgud did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning NYFCC, for portraying Clive Langham in Providence.
John Gielgud's role here is one of the strangest leading performances you might encounter in terms of the construction of it. As for the first hour and 20 minutes, of a 110 minute long film, you rarely see Gielgud, but you almost constantly hear him. Although not your standard narration of a man describing his life, rather it is something more difficult to pinpoint, although more common for Alain Renais with a certain degree of a stream of consciousness, though this isn't exactly that, though partially that, as it also appears the ideas of a writer constructing ideas, while either sleeping or not sleeping through a long night. Although this may seem a tethered Gielgud in description, it is perhaps Gielgud's most untethered as a screen performer. While Gielgud otherwise has memorable cinematic roles, the vast majority of them are within a certain regal requirement in terms of the overall range within which he is allowed to play, the role of Clive Langham allows a far greater expression than was usually granted within Gielgud's characters. All of that despite our introduction of him being only his voice as he speaks to this story he appears to be relating about his son as a cold lawyer, his daughter-in-law as an unsatisfied wife, his bastard son as the strange potential love of his daughter-in-law and his wife as his son's much older mistress.
Gielgud's voice is one of those that cuts through any moment, even when not seen, by just the regal grandness of it. The way he speaks here though is a bit different from that, occasionally as he Clive seems to overtly directly the action there is that power to it, but Gielgud underlines it with maybe just a bit of distress to make things go his "way" in his vision/dream/subconscious, I'll just say story going forward for the sake of brevity. Gielgud's performance isn't not at all narration in the typical sense, closer to commentary, if not even argument with maybe Renais himself as he goes about watching this tale unfold, even if he seems to hold the power in such a story. Gielgud's exact delivery advises meaning within the words spoken in reaction to or in trying to create the story. Occasionally this is simple, even comical by Gielgud as he consistently acts in disgust to the repeated appearance of an older gentlemen, which Gielgud immediately grants you the exasperation for a man he views as a bit of joke, though is far too familiar with and just wants out of his mind as swiftly as possible. There's more complexity with those that are his family, particularly his son, where Gielgud brings a callous viciousness about every little change in his plan, such as giving him an older mistress, and his constant criticism Gielgud denotes a certain vile plotting against the nature of him each time.
Gielgud owns the quality within Clive's voice conducting it with this bawdy insistence for his perspective of his "children" where Gielgud plays with it in this combination of a more earnest joyful playfulness and something more sinister in a combined measure. Gielgud's commentary creates this fascinating combination between a certain entertainment in his conducting combined with something a bit more off-putting in the bitterness within the cattiness. His manner with potential illicit love affairs, Gielgud brings this insistent need for the idea to be true in every word he speaks, with a fixation not built so much on lust rather a necessity for his mental well being. Gielgud only through his voice crafts a tapestry of the man's world through every word, while doing so in such a way where his voice alone is captivating. The story is occasionally interrupted with a horrible vision of an old man being dissected, hence the nature of the story not exactly being just that, which Clive seems to treat as a challenge to whoever is constructing his visions, where Gielgud's reaction every time is pitch perfect in the combination between disgust and discontent that such easy imagery of perhaps his own corpse isn't enough to disturb him, while also still suggesting that it isn't as though Clive is undisturbed.
The man is more literally disturbed by his physical pains as he awakens in this night, and we do suddenly see Gielgud more than a few times writhing in his discomforts. The descriptions of his pain are brilliant deliveries by Gielgud each and every time, as he fashions the pain within his words, even though we also see his expression this time to match it. There is a vividness within the description, and even as Clive attempts to maintain his cleverness, Gielgud's performance creates a very real and visceral anguish. There's an essential moment however during the long night that seems to speak so much more about the truth of Clive than the story that is being related as we pause for a moment for us to see Clive talking about a seemingly innocuous story about his son, at an earlier younger time, stating that they had a dinner where the son spoke of maturing through learning moral language as a logical proposition. A seemingly odd yet incredible moment as Gielgud makes it such a powerful scene because it is the expression of Clive finally reveals so much emotional vulnerability suddenly and you see perhaps the raw nerves in the man that he hides through his dismissive tale. You see that in the moment of the real father who has dismissed his son and hates himself for it behind the veneer of callousness. Revealing the real beating heart and shame of the man. Something that becomes clear in perhaps the most telling vision where we see Clive approach his wife having committed suicide, where we see a relatively brief but essential moment of Clive finding here. Gielgud's presence is so very different in the moment in this sort of resigned sadness, as a man not devastated in the same way as this almost expectation of the results of his failures.
The film unexpectedly shifts for the final twenty minutes into "reality" and away from the story. Where his son, bastard son and daughter-in-law all come to visit him for his 78th birthday, something earlier bemoaned in that brilliant way only Gielgud can in his pithy way. But now in the real world of Clive, all three seem so much happier, more content and altogether complete people. They aren't living in drama, they just are generally comfortable, with the only discomfort coming from Clive. Gielgud's outstanding throughout the sequence and doesn't waste his now consistent appearance, as it is in his performance that he must unlock the truth of the man. As much of what happens is just generalities of a birthday party, such as gifts from his children, which Clive accepts graciously enough between pleasantries. The truth is in the break, not by the guests, but by Clive, where Gielgud reveals the intensity of the insecurity through the subtle moments of reactions and questions. While Gielgud presents Clive being on his best behavior he allows you to read between the lines such as his overcompensating when saying his bastard son is restrained with this phony force, of such a blunt man, of someone convincing himself that his sin was less than it was. When inquiring about just how healthy his son's marriage actually seems to be, Clive asks again, with Gielgud being charming his way, but with this seething desire for some sort of flaw in the marriage to somehow satiate his need to downplay his own failures as a father and as a husband. Gielgud's performance is a fascinating example of one where it thrives even within a film that most certainly is a "director's film". Gielgud's greatness is within every moment, heard or seen he does have in creating the emotional key towards the purposefully enigmatic narrative. He helps you find the way to connect to this strange tale, by uncovering the broken heart of the man, through every expected snipe, but also a more honest moment of genuine regret. While Gielgud certainly excelled as the regal force in so many films, Providence offers the opportunity for Gielgud to uncover more within his cinematic presence, not wasting a second or even a word in creating an entertaining, captivating, dynamic but also emotional portrait of a man compensating for the failure of his life.
83 comments:
Delighted with another 5 for Gielgud.
Haven't seen this yet, but I'm hoping you'll love him in Prospero's Books because the construction of that performance is not dissimilar to how you describe this one, in the sense of thriving in a "Director's Film", and particularly the constant use of his voice.
Updated remaining films to watch list
Jesus Of Nazareth
The Duellists
The Goodbye Girl
Sorcerer
Annie Hall
Cross Of Iron (Re-watched it recently and Schell's my Supporting Actor runner-up)
Wizards
Pete's Dragon
The Lacemaker (could be a great Huppert performance)
Sleeping Dogs (early breakthrough role for Sam Neill)
House
Jabberwocky
The Hunters
Peppermint Soda
The Report
Between The Lines
The Man Who Loved Women
Islands In The Stream
"Renee Zellweger - Cold Mountain (CHECK)"?
What does that check part mean? I don't get it
Tim: I'm sure his pick is Shohreh Aghdashloo in House Of Sand And Fog.
Tim:
It was the year that I couldn't think of the nominees off the top of my head, but I forgot to check before posting the list.
Louis, rating and thoughts on David Warner.
Louis: Thoughts on the trailer for Brothers?
Louis: Your 10 favorite Shakespearean monologues, and your favorite cinematic rendition of each one?
Tahmeed: That is an excellent question.
Louis: Thoughts on the Mickey 17 trailer?
Luke: Agreed about Schell. I think an argument could be made for him being co-lead too.
I found the Mickey 17 trailer to be VERY promising, definitely seems more Okja than Parasite awards prospect-wise, but that hardly matters because Okja's a very good film too. Pattinson's definitely going for it, and I can't wait to see his full performance(s).
Anonymous & Luke:
Krieps - (Brings an atypical energy for a western lead, and her performance is effective in essentially bringing something different within a well worn genre obviously. Her performance even when her character is the victim Krieps finds a willfulness within her own performance that makes her character more dynamic mainly through that energy that she brings. She has something off-beat just about her which grants something captivating even when she might be in a relatively rudimentary scene on the whole.)
Mortensen - (Mortensen rarely isn't solid as the lead, and that is the case once again. He just does an average exasperated man extremely well and always effectively as he builds towards his character finally taking action. All of that is well performed by Mortensen and has a subdued yet genuine chemistry with Krieps that is less some intense love and more just a subdued warm connection that entirely works. It isn't the hardest pushing performance from him, but reliable work from him.)
Dunst - (So with both her in this and Leigh in Annihilation makes me wonder if Garland is just really terrible when directing someone to be exhausted by life and just mixes it up with giving a dull performance. As for Dunst's performance I'll admit I almost found it comical at times with just how little energy she brought to it, and that same "I'm Bored" face she was consistently making. The problem is I didn't sense the weight of someone who has seen it all in her expression and I just found it a not at all dynamic performance failing to be engaging. I didn't get the history of this woman who has seen too much, rather just a performer seeming bored much of the time. Dunst can be great, so I can chalk it up to both Garland's poor direction and miscalculation...however after this and Power of the Dog maybe Dunst going for subdued internalization isn't the best approach for her.)
Moura - (Speaking of miscalculation, Moura is the same who just keeps it big and strangely without impact. Again the general idea like Dunst makes sense, he's gone insane from what he's seen, she's just become desensitized. Two different ways to express the idea, unfortunately with both performances the weight needed for the approach is missing. Moura just seems like an actor overacting with how big he goes with every line, and you don't get a proper sense of the real seething desperation below the bravado. Making it just seem like he's acting weird in such a situation rather than being genuinely part of it all.)
Spaeny - (Her performance is slightly better in that she's at least expressing emotion that makes sense for a given scene, however at the same time she does really make any steps for you to really see her come alive. Everything seems a little too light, her drive for the picture for example seems so rudimentary as though she's just some random teenager looking for fun rather than in a warzone looking for the real moments. Maybe that is what Garland was going for, but again just a bad idea if that was the case, OR there needed to be a clearer translation from that type to someone finding the reality of the situation. That doesn't appear though in either her performance or the script however.)
Henderson - (The one member of the main crew where you do genuinely sense the weight of the situation. Henderson even when joking is able to underline the words with that sense of history and wisdom to the truths of what all this could mean. Henderson shows what is lacking in the other performances because you do feel in every one of his deliveries and reactions so much more within his character that is even presented within the narrative. There is a life to his reporter that is missing in the others and brings a much needed reality to the film that seems far too detached otherwise.)
Plemons - (Gets to dust off his Todd creepiness, and does so effectively without just doing Todd either, does have his own method here. Bringing the vicious nationalism with an ease as though it is just his perceived duty to kill as he pleases with this unnerving certainty about everything he's doing.)
Poehler - (Fine reprise and brings something within the moments of Joy's frustrations, even if that element within the story is probably one that isn't fully developed, she is good in bringing the expected, well, joy along with some variations within that overall approach.)
Hawke - (Genuinely great voice work because she so much embodies everything about the character in just her hurried delivery that switches on a dime, and creates tension within it. While doing it in a way that manages to be fun, while also genuinely intense, and her performance manages to not make Anxiety villainous as overtly because she has that desperation in her voice the whole time. She never limits her performance to a singular quality in her voice, despite having that specific intensity the whole time, and just wonderfully is able to play around with Anxiety's exact role throughout the film. Anxiety is an essential part to what makes the sequel work and Hawke is pivotal to that.)
Tallman - (Brings a genuine straightforward emotion and realistic teenage manner to her performance. It's always convincing as a real teenager within her delivery rather than becoming an overt idea of one that could've been the case. Instead her delivery, even when being played around with different emotions, offers some weight of authenticity to it even in the sillier moments.)
Free - (The film suffers from not really dealing with anything in the character, whether that be her apparent troubled background, her theoretical struggle with her faith or anything else. Free's performance is almost entirely about just being within the moment of scenes, particularly in playing within the ideas of reacting to the horrors around her or discovering the very personal horrors she is facing within herself. The only real character is that she is generally caring where she does bring a nice warmth to her role before being put in that ringer. To her credit she carries so many of the scenes by just being absolutely convincing in presenting the intensity of her emotional desperation and horror at seeing what happens to her.)
Ineson - (I mean he's great at exposition due to his great voice, and everything he says has an immediate gravity. Unfortunately he really has no character other than being an exposition device.)
Patel - (In the grand scheme of his recent performances not as impressive as his best work, but Patel brings a real charisma and intensity here that is of a proper leading man in every sense of the word. He is even able to gloss beyond the simplicity of some of the moments because he brings such a captivating conviction through every second of his performance and carries you through so many moments through his presence. Patel these days has proven he has *it*, and this is just another notch in that progression.)
Anonymous:
Well Close is certainly unrecognizable, though that's the only thing that struck me from the trailer which joke wise wasn't hitting, however maybe it will come together with the actual film given I have liked work from the creative team there.
Tony:
I enjoyed everything about it, including Pattinson's unexpected accent, and seems more like silly Bong closer to Okja than Parasite, which given I thoroughly enjoy Okja, that's fine by me.
Luke Higham
Louis: Since Jonathan brought the topic up, I don't think you'll have time to watch the greatest TV doc of all time, The World At War (1973) but can I have your thoughts on the opening scene from episode 1. Olivier's narration is spellbinding.
youtube.com/watch?v=0b4g4ZZNC1E&pp=ygUYVGhlIHdvcmxkIGF0IHdhciBvcmFkb3Vy
00:10-01:50
My comment's going into spam.
Louis: https://youtu.be/7Z-l2ouX_uo?si=bM_IX-qeelvR_TLU
Just kidding, you can take your time with that list, and you don't have to limit yourself to 10 if it's difficult.
Louis: What rating did you originally give Robertson for Obsession? It’s a rare time where I would give a flat 1.
Louis: What did you think of the Blitz trailer.
Has anybody decided on their backlog picks. I'm going with King Kong (2005), Naomi Watts should be higher than 6th in the lead actress ranking.
Thomas: I thought about Childhood Of A Leader but I'll probably go with an animated film again, most likely Dreamworks.
Louis: If you're still doing the birthday film request thing, would you mind checking out Devi around October 3rd. If you don't have time, I'll just make it my backlog request.
Louis: one last thing about Sterben, last February I interviewed Matthias Glasner, would you give the article a readwheb you have time? It’s in Italian, so you’ll have to use google translator, but I hope the translation won’t ruin the meaning of Glasner’s words (https://www.odgmagazine.com/una-sinfonia-estremamente-personale-intervista-al-regista-matthias-glasner/). He shared interesting details on the two sequences I asked you about and how personal and autobiographical the movie is.
I already decided on Mockingjay Part II last year.
Kapurush (1965)
Tahmeed:
"Lend Me Your Ears" - Charlton Heston
"Cry Havoc" - Marlon Brando
"Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow" - Bill Camp(I don't think it was too much I appreciated the range)
St. Crispin's Day - Laurence Olivier
"I hate the Moor" - Kenneth Branagh
"Send him to Heaven" - Christopher Plummer
First Player Speech - Charlton Heston (which I get why it's always cut but also it's a shame).
"A Plague On Both Your Houses" - John McEnery
And I won't try to be too cool for School:
"To Be Or Not To Be" - Laurence Olivier
"Now is the Winter of Discontent" - Ian McKellen
Anonymous:
Nicholson - 4(Nicholson is ideal for this kind of naturalistic role though the performance purposefully is very passive within the narrative, particularly in terms of her relationship with the troublesome men which are more explained by her own monologue than we see in her moments with the men. Nicholson of course is great in the delivery of the idiosyncratic choice of her character however in a way that makes internal logic with herself, and has a genuine need associated with it even if there is also granted this sort of accepted mistake on her part...which she keeps committing. Otherwise Nicholson's work is extremely subdued even in being subdued, particularly in terms of expressing what is actually going on with her character. Nicholson regardless of how enigmatic the titular Janet is, she does bring forth that naturalism she's so good at, that you completely believe her in this sense even if the scope of the character is a bit limited.)
Ziegler - 4(I think her performance works in a portrayal of a not particularly charismatic kid, which kids aren't always charismatic. And in that sense she brings the naturalistic quality in being kind of awkward and not always specifically appealing in the sense of the way kid characters are often made to be these bright spots. She's not that, but her performance I think is convincing in creating that different kind of cinematic kid in a way that does avoid its own pitfalls, like becoming a caricature where she's too defined by her not fitting in. She finds a reasonable place within her performance to explore the emotions honestly within the overarching less common approach that is convincing in its own way.)
Koteas & Patton - 3.5(Both performances are good in portraying some immediately tiresome characters. One tiresome by just being internalized unpleasant and the other by being externally full himself...and unpleasant. Both are entirely convincing in playing these less than appealing notes to be just these endearing presence that is most tangible though in its not endearing manner.)
Okonedo - 4.5(The best part of the film as she brings so much complicated life to her performance. She brings the sense of warmth with Nicholson and a generally eager demeanor of someone who wants to make these connections again, and in her playful, affable yet not quite fully connected chemistry with her do you get a bit of their history just through performance. You can see how they might have been closer and further at times, and in this moment they've found something of an understanding albeit not complete. She's wonderful in the scenes of explaining their history where she is able to bring the right kind of nuance as she does criticize Janet quite bluntly at times, yet even in that you are granted a sense of love at the same time. Every moment she is onscreen she takes over the film so completely, that I won't lie, I probably would've preferred the film if she had been the main character, or at least had been throughout the film.)
Luke:
I actually randomly saw the episode with Jimmy Stewart once, don't recall why. Anyway, I would concur, quite the powerful and haunting opening with striking narration by Olivier, in so pointedly describing a single profound scar of World War II purposefully left behind.
Robert:
Maybe an overly generous 2, though really that's probably much too high for a performance that could be used as the dictionary definition of "wooden".
Jonathan:
Uhh, looks *fine* which isn't a knock other than I guess it didn't blow me away with anything seen in it, and Ronan's performance even seemed a little shaky, though EASILY could be great in context. However given it is McQueen I think the film probably will be very different in style than the more overtly inspirational quality being sold by the trailer.
Tahmeed:
Well I was giving the okay specifically for shorts, because of the limited time commitment aka I knew I most likely could fulfill the promise.
Omar:
I certainly shall give it a read.
Louis: What are your thoughts on Ronald Reagan in Kings Row?
Louis: Your thoughts on Freddie Fox and Sope Dirisu in Slow Horses.
His three Daughters is a major improvement over the fairly intolerable French Exit for Jacobs. Very much reliant on the trio of central performances, with Lyonne the easy MVP, though the character as written is closer to her typical wheelhouse the film allows her a greater emotional range here that she thrives with her naturalistic performance. I'll admit contrasting that I found Coon and Olsen a little too mannered in the earliest scenes, piling it on to set up their "types" a little too hard to set up their characters initially, though I found both improved greatly as the film went on to feel like actual people by the end. As the tale of three daughters having to interact to see through their father's hospice care, there are more expected moments than inspired ones, however most are granted an essential life and emotional impact through the performances....again particularly from Lyonne.
Coon - 4
Lyonne - 5
Olsen - 4
Sanders - 4
Adepo - 3.5
Galvan - 3
Louis, your thoughts on the "Blitz" Trailer?
Louis, your top 10 Best and Worst Leading Actress winners, and with the worst, who should've won instead?
How would you rank the same for Original Song?
J96, he commented on the Blitz trailer above, in response to Jonathan.
Louis: Your post-2013 film roles for James Gandolfini.
Louis: Also, would it be safe to say you've thrown in the towel on Alex Garland by now? At least he'll always Ex Machina.
Louis: Thoughts on Brothers trailer?
Louis: Other than remakes, sequels, etc., your favorite examples of films referencing other films?
Ytrewq: Not to be "that guy", but he responded to the Brothers trailer above.
Louis: Talking of trailers, your thoughts on the teasers for Families Like Ours, The Franchise, and M: Son of the Century?
The Substance falls under one of those rare films where you can essentially make one edit and massively improve the film. As if this film ended twenty minutes early, it would've been one of my favorites of the year as it has an ideal final shot, only to keep going to the point that I question if my feelings should degrade even further. Forgetting the ending for a moment, I was loving much of this film in a very Bram Stoker's Dracula kind of way, where it isn't subtle, it is style more than substance (ironically), and could fit into anthology horror hour just fine in terms of the actual plot. Having said that, I enjoyed Seconds a la Cronenberg through the filter of Refn, just for owning its absurdity through its heightened performances, its beautiful cinematography, disgusting sound design (compliment), and particularly eye-catching production design all in the service of fiendish grotesquery. I can see how even this portion isn't for everyone, but I was living for it....then the last twenty minutes made me go "I GET IT ALREADY" and worse it went from Cronenberg/Refn to early Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi. Which no disrespect to the work of those two, I enjoy some of it, but didn't find it the best shift in this instance....particularly when just ending with a certain reveal would've been just right in my mind and avoided the train derailment.
Moore - 4.5
Qualley - 4.5(Co-lead)
Quaid - 4
Louis: See, my issue with The Substance is that I was saying "I GET IT ALREADY" after the first 20 minutes or so.
I feel as if I now know how you felt last year with Asteroid City,
Lucas:
Reagan - (As an actor actually was one who seemed to be better the more the role asked of him, the less there was the stiffer he was so his sort of disposable roles are where he is the worst. Kings Row being the most challenging role I've seen for him therefore in turn offers his best performance. Although that is with the caveat as the early scenes where less is asked of him, is a bit stiff at times, however when he goes from supporting "more put together guy" to first suddenly burdened unexpected hero, Reagan brings genuine bit of weight into his covering for his friend, with the complexity of the false shame but real concern. Later in the film when what happens to him, happens, Reagan is effective in bringing the intensity to the trauma which is striking against his earlier carefree scenes, where in a way his stiffer presence in makes his strained manner all the more impactful. Playing effectively then the character's quiet depression.)
Anonymous:
Fox - (He's great at being a shitheel (no better word for his character here), in every scene he's in and just owning every little self-satisfied petty moment of it. Fox emphasizes the horribleness in every way whether that be his pompousness towards River, or also his sycophantic sniveling manner whenever he's taken to task. These types of roles often go wrong because the actor is too one note, well Fox is never not "the worst" but he manages to be the "worst" so well and finding new ways to be the "worst" in every one of his scenes. You couldn't ask for a better sort of everything you could possibly hate in an intelligence agent, as Fox is too much, but manages to never be too much which is quite the trick.)
Dirisu - (Dirisu essentially gives the type of performance you'd find in a more straightforward type spy show, where you get the man burdened by his mission, with a sharp conviction in his moral code, but also a dogged manner that takes him to extremes. In comparison to say Lowden, who is very competent but also hapless in his own way, Dirisu is the man who just knows what he's doing directly. And as much as that sounds like maybe too standard of a performance he offers the right sort of contrast for his character, creating an innate sympathy even as he is the pseudo villain in his early episodes.)
J96:
Best:
1. Vivien Leigh - Gone With the Wind
2. Charlize Theron - Monster
3. Vivien Leigh - A Streetcar Named Desire
4. Maggie Smith - The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie
5. Kathy Bates - Misery
6. Holly Hunter - The Piano
7. Jodie Foster - The Silence of the Lambs
8. Emma Stone - Poor Things
9. Katherine Hepburn - The Lion in Winter
10. Sissy Spacek - Coal Miner's Daughter
Although tough as there are actually a lot of great winners.
Worst:
Julie Christie - Darling (Elizabeth Hartman - A Patch of Blue)
Bette Davis - Dangerous (Katherine Hepburn - Alice Adams)
Helen Hayes - The Sin of Madelon Claudet
Katherine Hepburn - Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (Anne Bancroft - The Graduate)
Katheirne Hepburn - On Golden Pond (Meryl Streep - The French Lieutenant's Woman)
Katherine Hepburn - Morning Glory (May Robson - Lady for a Day)
Jessica Lange - Blue Sky (Winona Ryder - Little Women...though that lineup will never cease to disgust me)
Mary Pickford - Coquette
Natalie Portman - Black Swan (Jennifer Lawrence - Winter's Bone)
Julia Roberts - Erin Brockovich (Ellen Burstyn - Requiem for a Dream)
Elizabeth Taylor - Butterfield 8 (Shirley MacLaine - The Apartment)
Bryan:
Paul Hunham - The Holdovers
Doc - Baby Driver
John Stone - The Night Of (obviously)
Chef Slowik - The Menu (For a very different take but one I think could've worked)
I mean I already did with Men to be honest, which is why I didn't watch Civil War until after theaters. But yes he's in "approach with caution" territory at best. Honestly I think he needs to lighten up more than a little, as even though Ex Machina was serious as a whole the very specific use of Oscar Isaac in the film was perhaps even more essential than I had already thought.
Tony:
Families Like Ours looks like Vinterberg, aka something kind of forces normal people to be disrupted from their comfort zone, so intrigued to see what he does with a miniseries to say the least...though do wish we could get the magical ingredient of Mikkelsen alas I will have to wait another 8 years or so the same year one of my all time favorite leading male performances also drops.
Well a Succession writer at the helm seems promising on the writer's side, as does the premise of satirizing Marvel, and I'll say the jokes in the trailer did mostly land for me. I do have my concerns of Mendes directing as comedy has never been a suit I think he wears well. In fact it frequently looks awful on him.
Speaking of directors I have trust issues with, Joe Wright I don't know if he's the man to maneuver the very tricky ground of the villain protagonist, having said that the reviews say maybe I shouldn't worry, Richard III approach to Mussolini certainly has potential, and Marinelli looks like he's ready to deliver (an actor who most I don't think have gotten the chance to see his talent yet, but he's certainly very talented).
Louis: your director and casts for an 80’s, 90’s, and 2000’s version of The Substance?
Random viewing note, here...I rewatched "Whiplash" for the first time in years tonight. Having only seen it once close to when it came out, I don't think I absorbed the film fully back then. Revisiting it now, I forgot how visceral and well constructed the movie is.
Needless to say also, 2014 saw a lot of very strong supporting performances, as well as an impressive oscar lineup. But no one was touching Simmons - such a striking and full bodied turn.
Tony: Well admittedly I was exhausted when I came home and wrote this yesterday.
Ytrewq: No worries, it happens.
Marcus:
Do you mean direct references or homages or both?
Anonymous
The Substance 1980's directed by Andrzej Żuławski:
Elisabeth: Dorothy Malone
Sue: Isabelle Adjani
Harvey: Ray Milland
The Substance 1990's directed by David Cronenberg:
Elisabeth: Dyan Cannon
Sue: Jennifer Jason Leigh
Harvey: Richard Widmark
The Substance 2000's directed by Abel Ferrara:
Elisabeth: Barbara Hershey
Sue: Heather Graham
Harvey: Harvey Keitel
Louis: I was thinking more along the lines of homages, like In the Mood for Love in Everything Everywhere All at Once.
Louis: Your thoughts on Henry's conversations with the soldiers before the morning of St. Crispin in Olivier's Henry V? As much as I loved the delivery of the iconic monologue, my favorite moment in Olivier's work (and what makes him a 5 for me) is that extended close-up with the Chorus's narration, taking in everything he's heard.
Louis, your top 10 Best and Worst Best Original Song Winners, and with the worst, who should have won instead?
Being that Best Actress is a very strong category, my guess is that the top 20 (11 - 20) would look something like:
Olivia DeHavilland - The Heiress
Marion Cotillard - La Vie En Rose
Olivia Colman - The Favorite
Louise Fletcher - Cukoo’s Nest
Francis McDormand - Fargo
Sally Field - Norma Rae
Diane Keaton - Annie Hall
Faye Dunaway - Network (A Personal Favorite)
Janet Gaynor - (Her three)
Elizabeth Taylor - Virginia Wolf?
Meryl Streep - Sophie’s Choice
Ellen Burstyn, Anne Bancroft, or Audrey Hepburn
How accurate am I?
J96: Streep and Taylor are 4.5's for Sophie's Choice and Virginia Woolf. I don't quite recall Keaton's rating for Annie Hall, and if I'm not mistaken, he hasn't seen Gaynor's winning performance(s).
Louis: Since you mentioned it on the last post, how would you say Barton Fink is perceived among the film lovers you've talked to? I was a bit surprised to see you list it, as I've always gotten the impression that many (like myself) consider it among the Coens' finest works.
You may also be surprised by the number of fans for Silence and The Quiet Man out there. Ford in particular has gained more acolytes in recent years, I think.
Louis: I can confirm via Film Twitter that Silence is rather popular.
Everyone I know who's seen Silence has it down as a definite 5 star film, which I find very vindicating to all of us here from (can't believe it) almost 8 years ago. I still wonder exactly how its award campaign was messed up so badly, as despite it being a challenging film, it should have been a nominations juggernaut on paper alone.
I remember going to Reddit during those times, and many people just talked about how badly miscast Andrew Garfield was in the lead role, his accent and how Adam Driver should have played the main lead cause he is far more talented etc.
This is from 2017-2019 social media era.
Tony:
Let me make a quick clarification before anyone gets to The Hunt, Another Round, or Stalag 17. I was referring to "mainstream cinephile" specifically, which to put it crassly is the sort of individual that says they love Non-English Language films because they watched Amelie one time, and often kind of are those who watch more than blockbuster movies yet don't often seek out slightly off the beaten path films, even in a popular filmmaker's filmography. For example, the Coen Brothers' best film IS No Country For Old Men or Fargo in this perspective there is no argument Barton Fink, if seen, is "too weird", Scorsese's non-crime films are scoffed at. This sort of perspective you can see in the imdb ratings just for evidence, as Silence has a 7.2, Barton Fink has a 7.6, neither are bad ratings but far below sort of the curated list of "great films" from those filmmakers that I am referring to.
And I should note I don't wish to sound snobby or separate people from "real cinephiles" to "fake cinephiles", it was just something I've noticed.
Silence is one of the those films where I wish in an alternate timeline that Siskel and Ebert could have seen it because I would have loved to have seen their review of it.
Silence is one of those movies you know would have 150% been Ebert’s favorite movie of that year, if not decade.
Louis, thoughts on the new trailer or Gladiator 2?
J96:
Swap Keaton, Gaynor, Taylor and Streep, for Loren, McDormand (#2), Geraldine Page and Anne Bancroft you're just about right.
Song:
Best:
1. "I'm Easy" - Nashville
2. "Falling Slowly" - Once
3. "Skyfall" - Skyfall
4. "White Christmas" - Holiday Inn
5. "The Weary Kind" - Crazy Heart
6. "Moon RIver" - Breakfast at Tiffany's
7. "The Way You Look Tonight" - Swing Time
8. "Beauty and the Beast" - Beauty and the Beast
9. "Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head" - Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
10. "Naatu Naatu" - RRR
Note: I'm going by the film version only as otherwise Mona Lisa would probably make the top ten if I was considering the Nat King Cole version.
Worst:
1. "You Must Love Me" - Evita ("That Thing You Do!" - That Thing You Do!)
2. "Secret Love" - Calamity Jane ("That's Amore" - The Caddy)
3. "We Belong Together" - Toy Story 3 ("I See the Light" - Tangled)
4. "We Many Never Love Like This Again" - The Towering Inferno ("Blazing Saddles" - Blazing Saddles)
5. "It Goes Like It Goes" - Norma Rae ("Rainbow Connection" - The Muppet Movie)
6. "Evergreen" - A Star Is Born ("Gonna Fly Now" - Rocky)
7. "For All We Know" - Lovers and Other Strangers ("Thank You Very Much" - Scrooge)
8. "If I Didn't Have You" - Monsters, Inc. ("May It Be" - LOTR: THe Fellowship of the Ring)
9. "Jai Ho" - Slumdog Millionaire ("Down to Earth" - Wall-E)
10. "It's Hard Out Here For a Pimp" - Hustle & Flow ("Travelin' Thru" - Transamerica)
So yes if you want to ever torture me, play non-stop 70's romantic ballads and Post-00's Pixar Randy Newman.
I typically don't watch second trailers if I'm already interested in seeing the film.
Tahmeed:
Beautifully told moment by Olivier both as actor and director. I like his light touches in terms of the setting of his direction, while still making it cinematic, particularly in the use of the final sunset, yet keeps it very intimate and very directed on the emotional connection between the King and his men professing his loyalty. And the whole sequence within his reactions is ideal for use to prove Olivier's soulfulness, that I always find baffling when some have claimed he lacked as a performer.
Marcus:
Left off overt parodies.
One Shot - The Player/Touch of Evil
Escalator - Jackie Brown/The Graduate (although all his film basically have at least a few)
Seeing Christ - Hail Caesar/Ben-Hur
The House - Parasite/High and Low
Walking into the Past - Crimes & Misdemeanors/Wild Strawberries
Stairs - The Untouchables/Battleship Potemkin
Looking to God in Confession - The Immigrant/The Passion of Joan of Arc (At least I assume)
Not lovers lovers - EEAO/In the Mood for Love
Goodfellas/The Great Train Robbery
Hey you get your damn hands off her - Back to the Future/I Wanna Hold Your Hand
Dang, I like "It Goes like it Goes". At least your bottom 10 doesn't include "When you Believe", Another song that I love, the version within the film AND the Whitney & Mariah version. It does not deserve the hate. I'm guessing "The Morning After" would be your number 11, with "You Light up my Life" somewhere in the 11-15.
Thoughts on the trailer for Thunderbolts? (Though I myself have kind of clocked out of the MCU at this point).
Louis: Have you softened on Eminem's Lose Yourself then? I think I recall you saying you didn't care for the song, and then saying that you enjoyed Eminem's performance of it at the Academy Awards.
J96:
Well "When You Believe" was in consideration for the top tier, although I'm not crazy about the pop rendition (though don't hate it) I love the film version.
I actually don't hate "Light Up My Life" (though written by a wretched human) or The Morning After despite also being 70's romantic ballads.
Tahmeed:
Yes, after giving more of a shot then just writing it off as a genre that isn't my favorite, it's incredibly well put together song, where the rap itself is implemented with the overall flow of the instrumental elements especially effectively in the way they build the intensity of the flow particularly which is often my distance in the genre.
Louis: Any movies from 2013 onwards that you think Ebert would have really gone for? Alternatively, any you think he would give zero/half-a-star to?
Louis: On the subject of Barton Fink, what is your thematic interpretation of the film, particularly the ending? If you've gone over it before, I couldn't find it.
Louis: While #1 is obvious, could I have your top 5 songs from John Carney's films?
Robert:
Silence
Drive My Car
Nomadland
Sound of Metal
Room
His lowest reviews typically were for aggressively crass, mean spirited or cynical films so my best guesses would be:
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice
Kingsman: The Golden Circle
Halloween Kills
Tony:
My interpretation is that he's entered purgatory after having been in hell, with there being a "window" to purgatory from hell the whole time. As everything Barton does before the moment is himself going through temptations and sins connected his own hypocrisies. He doesn't listen to the common man (Charlie) he flaunts himself as a writer to said common men (the sailors) yet plagiarizes himself, he is treated sycophantly by a man who wants him to sell his soul to the studio as a man of temptation, his own hero is destroyed in front of him breaking the men then indulging in his own sexual need related to his own inadequacy to write, the bible itself isn't the bible in this place but Barton's own personal hell of his writer's block...and then also you the murders and the hotel burning stuff like that. Why purgatory? Well the devil of the soul (Mundt) is gone, the devil of the flesh (Lipnick), is no longer sycophantic he's full blown antisemitic, and literally puts Barton in writer's purgatory for his punishment that he may or may not escape from. Which would sound like more hell, but the last image, as much as it isn't hope, but it is in a way one thing that is all pleasant in his interaction with the woman, even if it isn't as though she's super flirtatious or anything, she's just a person which certainly isn't heaven but it's not hell any more.
Tahmeed:
1. "Falling Slowly"
2. "Brown Shoes"
3. "To Find You"
4. "Meet in the Middle"
5. "Drive It Like You Stole It"
I've been watching a sitcom called Superstore. It's enjoyable, good comfort watch. Cast all fills their roles well, special mention to Lauren Ash who is absolutely hilarious.
Matt: I checked out a few episodes of Superstore due to the promise of Ben Feldman in a leading role (enjoyed him loads on Silicon Valley), and Ash absolutely is a riot.
Louis: Have you seen any new TV shows/seasons recently.
Louis: Thoughts on Josh Hartnett and Saleka Shyamalan in Trap.
Tahmeed:
New seasons of Only Murders, which liking to the degree I usually do, Slow Horses which loving so far, and The Penguin which had a strong first episode despite definitely being disappointed that Turturro's been replaced (which I like Mark Strong but a shame when Turturro had been so good in that role).
Anonymous:
Hartnett - (A performance that manages to dance around within the Shyamalan tone which is no easy trick. Hartnett's performance in the moments where he doesn't need to deliver the dialogue, he keeps a calm menace to his performance in sort of the balance between being the half-interested dad and the killer. On the former end Hartnett isn't; exactly overtly loving but there's enough of the put on warmth and awkwardness about him not as a killer pretending to be a normal guy, but rather a dad faking interest in his daughter's favorite singer. As the killer Hartnett brings the ease about the danger so effectively but not forcing it. The sort most sinister smiles and moments intensity are the most natural moments for him where the viciousness is just a complete given. Hartnett owns it in a way that makes him this constant force and the magnificent bastard type he should be. Where Hartnett probably most dances around the pitfalls is when he needs to be completely "normal" given how alien the dialogue often is, but Hartnett carries through it by in a way playing into it even more, which maybe shouldn't work but for him it does. Even as the film falls off its cliff Hartnett retains a consistency even managing to get through the most tired cliches involving a serial killer without getting bogged down by it.)
Shyamalan - (I'll say I think she is entirely believable as maybe not the best popstar but *a* popstar of some kind. Nothing about her performance in that regard did I think was labored or forced. When the film shifted to her becoming the protagonist I didn't think she was overly good, but honestly I didn't think she was atrocious either. She's on the border between bad and okay consistently through her performance, hardly becoming a true star in her own right in these scenes, but could've been worse all things considered.)
Excellent Blog Best Producer in Tamil Nadu
Post a Comment