Best Scene: Being given alibi.
4. Fernando Rey in Elisa, Vida Mía - Rey's working with a limited role but is effective in the different perspectives he is presented in.
Best Scene: Teaching.
3. Bruno S. in Stroszek - S's role is limited though there is something innately captivating about him once again.
Best Scene: Street performance.
2. William Devane in Rolling Thunder - Devane manages to maintain a captivating portrayal of a soldier lost at home and revenge, even though his film is all over the place.
Best Scene: Time to kill.
1. Boris Plotnikov in the Ascent - Plotnikov gives a truly haunting portrayal of a man finding his passion for life just as he is about die.
Best Scene: Final scene.
Next: A few 77 supporting reviews.
134 comments:
And no I didn't forget Keitel, I'm moving him over to supporting.
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the rest of the lead performances.
Your Female Lead and Supporting top 20s with ratings and other 4+ honourable mentions.
And your wins.
Final films To Watch
Sorcerer
Sleeping Dogs
Jabberwocky
Pete's Dragon
If Keitel's Supporting, does that mean you've upgraded him.
I'm happy that you've upgraded Coburn as well.
Louis: If it's not too much to ask, could you make the time to rewatch CE3K, A Special Day, and Saturday Night Fever? Just curious what your overall thoughts on those films would be.
Louis: Thoughts on Shepitko's direction of The Ascent?
Really hoping a surprise 5 for Ford. On my last rewatch (it was Despecialized, mind you) I was relieved that only did he add to Han the way I remembered, but even better. His delivery of "May the Force be with you" might be the most moving moment in the film.
Louis: Your 6-10 for Best Director, and when you have time, your Top 25 films of 1977.
Hello Louis!
Tell me from the year 1977 which are your Top 7 with ranking of:
- Song
- Score
- Poster
- Editing
- Screenplays (adapted and original)
- Cast
So glad you loved The Ascent. Interesting that you're moving Keitel over to Supporting.
Louis: Thoughts on The Duellists screenplay and cinematography.
Harrison Ford- Star Wars
Some players from A Bridge Too Far
Francois Truffaut- Close Encounters of the Third Kind
John Cassavetes- Opening Night
Maximilian Schell is a definite, would like Caan and Ford to get write-ups as well.
Hopper won't lose in Blue Velvet. So I think it's very likely that Keitel will win supporting, just like Day Lewis did in Gangs of New York.
I'd give him the runner-up spot if I too put him in Supporting Actor.
Shaggy: What does Blue Velvet have to do with it?
Matt: I wouldn't take much notice of it, he's been wanting a change in overall winner for near enough every year since he's been active on the blog.
Louis: Do you have any interest in seeing Rumours or Disclaimer? And it was a while ago at this point, but thoughts on the Sinners trailer?
For a start will get to all thoughts.
Luke:
Kazakos - 4(The performance manages to find enough of the fine line between sort of the grandiose of Greek tragedy with a much more basic reality within his performance. Allowing his work to be able to be genuine while also still selling the specific notions of the Greek tragedy without being over the top. And in a way he pulls it off by just playing it straight and with conviction even when the character is speaking of sacrifices to the gods that is usually left for less tangible stories, this one Kazakos's performance grounds it with the real guilt of a father. And that is frequently where the power of his work exists because he does very much grant the sense of love of the father in the sacrifice, even as he goes through it with the desperation of a man needing this to "work for him" that central facet is never lost. And even as he commits the horrible act, you see how it rips him apart, even if that also doesn't stop him.)
Radziwilowicz - 4(An effectively charismatic performance as we see his progression go from the image of a hero carefully constructed to becoming the man who is directly fighting against injustices as a much more real hero. His performance brings with it the right cultivation of heroism within his work essentially by slowly cultivating his passion to show the true spirit of the man as he becomes less so the "hero" the state wants him to be and is rather the actual hero to the people. He's also quite good in his final two scenes in very much emphasizing different elements of his performance to still show that he's the son of the man, but also is a different man at his core.)
Chamberlain - 4(Manages keep his head above best he can in terms of conveying the existential dread in his performance while also tempering it with the reality of the man just trying to figure out what is actually going on. He brings the right sort of internalization in terms of trying to contain the disparate threads in a single performance. I won't say it quite makes the film come together in terms of his own work, but Chamberlain is always captivating to an extent in managing to find the right tone even if the film doesn't quite let him take the next step.)
Shaw - 3.5(Is the most engaging actor in the film though the role is pretty limited as he basically needs to do Quint without the substance. Nonetheless, Shaw's captivating in his usual way in making the most of giving gravity and a bit of that sea salt energy to whatever lines he does have.)
Scott - (His rendition of Hemingwayesque is entirely good, though like the film it is lacking a certain extra something. I don't really think this is on Scott. He's good; he brings the right sort of tempered macho presence, though undercuts it effectively in the moments of being a bit more of a silly dad, and introspection. Altogether this is most promising, unfortunately the film doesn't take him past a certain point in this exploration leaving it as a good performance though limited.)
Tikhonov - 3.5(Charming enough goofball performance, though I think a bit overshadowed by his co-star who is more consistently dynamic, meanwhile he mostly just needs to do the nervous nerd routine, which he does perform with enough of an endearing quality to be sure.)
Carradine - 3.5(Sometimes seems a little lost within the narrative, and yes his character is supposed to be lost but Carradine himself seems lost too. There are moments though where he seems to find the right thread to grasp onto in portraying the character's intensity of his emotional desperation he tries to keep in, and in those moments Carradine is actually most impactful. Unfortunately those are more often the exception, though obviously a major step up from Bergman's previous English language lead.)
Marconi - 3.5(A limited but largely decent performance that very much serves the very specific vision of the film. As the character isn't quite a non-entity however part of it is just going through the motions of experience in a way and not becoming the active participant as is the usual protagonist. His performance I wouldn't say comes to life beyond that expectation but delivers at least in creating the specific type.)
Rey - 3.5(Overdubbed here, though he certainly sells physically the sense of swings between arousal and then frustration, with the latter growing each time. Conveying his way of looking kind of through the women just focus on the lust and see how that instantly becomes his choice, yet getting swept up each time in the same way.)
Denner - 3(I was okay with him in the early scenes where we see him going about his methods with a certain horny disregard for the typical manner, though consistent in his approach. Unfortunately there's a moment where I went "we're stuck with this guy?". And that's where it becomes less interesting as he just isn't terribly interesting, and as the more we see him with more women the more limited he seems to be on the whole. This is writing to be sure, but it is also Denner whose performance just doesn't quite sell the appeal of this man that all the women are interested in.)
Nolte - 2.5(Seems mostly lost in his performance as just trying to find something to work with, but there's just little to work with other than moving from one scene to another.)
Pacino - 2.5(Speaking of lost, Pacino seems adrift much of the time in portraying the romantic lead, if not maybe a little bored at times as well. There are moments where we see Pacino come to life in the role, but more often than not it feels like an actor regretting the choice to star with such rote material.)
Winkler - 1.5(Winkle can be charming obviously but you won't find any of that charm here. In fact this is a prototypical example one can use for a bad Oscar bait performance where every element feels like an actor trying to force out an Oscar winning performance. Winkler overplays the eccentricity to make it just that, eccentricity rather than the honest mania of a man. He overplays the attempts at charm within the role making him instead come off as extremely cloying at every point. Never do you sense a real trauma the man is going through just as an actor trying and failing to make a name as a dramatic performer. There was a pathway for this to work, even with Winkler, but he needed much better direction to point him in the right direction, which he does not have.)
Actress:
1. Shelley Duvall - 3 Women
2. Sissy Spacek - 3 Women
3. Gena Rowlands - Opening Night - 5
4. Geraldine Chaplin - Elisa, Vida Mia
5. Diane Keaton - Annie Hall - 5
6. Monique Mercure - J.A. Martin Photographer - 5
7. Lily Tomlin - The Late Show
8. Sophia Loren - A Special Day
9. Isabelle Huppert - The Lacemaker - 4.5
10. Diane Keaton - Looking For Mr. Goodbar - 4.5
11. Alisa Freindlich - Office Romance
12. Krystyna Janda - Man of Marble - 4.5
13. Simone Signoret - Madame Rosa - 4.5
14. Kathleen Quinlan - I Never Promised You A Rose Garden
15. Jane Fonda - Julia
16. Tatiana Papmoschou - Iphigenia - 4
17. Angela Molina - That Obscure Object of Desire - 4
18. Carole Bouquet - That Obscure Object of Desire - 4
19. Therese Liotard - One Sings, The Other Doesn't - 4
20. Jessica Harper - Suspiria - 4
Supporting:
1. Irene Papas - Iphigenia - 5
2. Shelley Winters - An Average Little Man -
3. Diana Rigg - A Little Night Music - 4.5
4. Liv Ullmann - The Serpent's Egg - 4.5
5. Joan Blondell - Opening Night - 4.5
6. Vanessa Redgrave - Julia
7. Liv Ullmann - A Bridge Too Far
8. Brigitte Fossey - The Man Who Loved Women - 4
9. Janice Rule - 3 Women - 4
10. Svetlana Nemolyaeva - Office Romance - 4
11. Belinda Meuldijk - Soldier of Orange
12. Bibi Andersson - I Never Promised You a Rose Garden - 4
13. Alida Valli - Suspiria - 4
14. Lisa Kreuzer - The American Friend
15. Diana Quick - The Duellists
16. Leslie Caron - The Man Who Loved Women - 4
17. Sylvia Sidney - I Never Promised You A Rose Garden - 4
18. Susan Tyrell - I Never Promise You a Rose Garden - 4
19. Joan Bennett - Suspiria - 4
20. Melinda Dillon - Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Tony:
I'll try to re-watch those.
I'll certainly watch Rumours at some point. I have been watching Disclaimer (I'll say the auteur taking on a miniseries is something I'm automatically intrigued by), beautifully shot (Delbonnel/Lubezki team-up is kind of a mind-blowing event) and have found it rather compelling so far, Blanchett, Cohen were quite good in the first two episodes, though Kevin Kline has been absolutely brilliant so far.
Sinners is my kind of trailer, nothing but mood, and what a thick potent mood is in that trailer. Makes you ask many questions in the right way and gets you just intrigued for the lurid southern gothic horror it seems to be running with.
Louis: Is Kathleen Quinlan a 4 or 4.5 for I Never Promised You A Rose Garden
Louis: Reading your Dreyfuss review, I was wondering, have you ever had any other "Eureka" or revelation moments where a movie or performance suddenly *clicked* for you?
Also, do I by any chance have any requests left?
Louis: Updated thoughts on Keaton in Annie Hall?
Louis: Thoughts on Myagkov in Office Romance.
Thoughts on the Female Performances.
Louis: Thoughts on direction, production design and cinematography of Suspiria.
RIP Mitzi Gaynor
your 2020s cast and Directors for Gaslight and The Grape of Wrath?
A:
Shepitko's direction is outstanding work again like Come and See and the Human Condition III, there is a very specific world and psychological place that it crafts as a kind of apocalyptic world though based on a very real time not long ago. Shepitko's sense of place is tremendous in the focus on the snowy uncompromising landscapes where you can feel that chill in the air as the men fail to find respite in any place. The use of the men within the cold spaces, and the construction of the interiors being just as uncompromising makes it as though the men are claustrophobically caught despite being in the open world before they are caught. When they are caught Shepitko adjusts her approach naturally to go from the literal world closing in, to the men being closed into the space of their mind. And her use of closeups in particular is just astonishing in what she is able to capture and the way the faces of the two central characters reflect two very different states of mind within the same situation. Her way of focusing on their eyes piercing through the screen particularly is unforgettable and makes it as though you see directly into the men beyond the typical point of your run of the mill closeup. This is along with her depiction of the whole process of dealing with prisoners, where there is a brutality but also this quiet matter of factness within those perpetrating the actions that makes it all the more callous and uncompromising. That would be enough but Shepitko's work has these couple key moments of sort of stepping aside from an exact reality, though not breaking it both that reflect the men's final scenes, one where there is this ascent and one where it is a descent. Her exact choices in her realization of each are brilliant because she doesn't fully break the canvas of the reality of the situation but amplifies just enough that it feels as tangible and also most emotionally powerful.
Jonathan:
The screenplay is marvelous work that is a key part of the efficiency in the piece and it is pretty incredible the way it is able to construct itself in so many ways all part of the same thing. To explain, there is a beautiful simplicity about the piece in the way he constructs itself out of the duels and near duels, you know the duel is the expectation and there is a straightforwardness within its storytelling. That is all the same thing, in that all points lead back to the duels which act as ideal set pieces for each chapter. But the greatness of the work is how much it manages to cover so efficiently in between the duels, while also making sure all of that also ties back into the duels. The most remarkable being the politics of Napoleon, as we go through his rise, downfall, comeback and then final exile through how it impacts our men. We know what happens to Napoleon but we also feel what happens by seeing how it changes the lives of each man. This is even more emphasized in the way through the characters around the men, the change in culture and basically what the expectation and reaction from each duel is. How it also naturally makes it so personal in the growth of each man's career but also their exact social standings intertwined with their romantic relationships. But what is amazing is how each all this intertwined within screenplay, punctuated by the duels, so as much as it is a petty thing, there is so much worked within from the deeply personal level of one trying to live his life to being interrupted, to the other defining himself by this singular phony attempt at an accomplishment, to the broadly political of one man representing Napoleon falling out of favor to the other finding his life in the reinstated gentry. And this is all made to look so easy in the screenplay, because it all feels so relaxed at the same time, no rush, despite so much time passing, while also just finding so much wit and humor in the ridiculousness of the situation, while never compromising the genuine drama.
The cinematography I might gather has a lot to do with Ridley Scott only because Tidy's otherwork doesn't have the brilliance of this work, where many Scott films look great, but regardless of the truth, it is a brilliantly shot film. And obviously influenced heavily by Barry Lyndon, but what it excels with is taking ideas from Lyndon but not trying to copy it. Where Kubrick/Alcott focused on picture perfection of recreating period portraits with natural light, Scott/Tidy take the aesthetic of the cinematography built on the naturalistic light, but rather than crafting it as specific in being picturesque makes it more interpersonal in the approach, less pristine theoretically, but also more visceral. Not that I would say the Duellists bests Lyndon in terms of cinematography, it doesn't (though the last shot does challenge it), but it is completely successful in taking the influence and finding its own approach. Making the word "dirtier" for the lack of a better word, though also as beautiful in capturing such different moods in a historical setting so pointedly again with the naturalistic lighting that again crafts such distinct atmosphere, while also being eye catching, which has the added benefit of making the this far away place in time feel completely tangible. And again, *that* final shot.
Watched 1408. Didn't necessarily expect this to be the case but Cusack is absolutely worth the eventual review.
Cusack-4.5
Jackson-4
McCormack-3
Shalhoub-3(Very brief appearance, but he adds a nice bit of colour)
Cariou-3
Anthony-3
ANYBODY WHO HAS NOT SEEN 1408, SKIP PAST THIS!
Matt: Your thoughts on the scene with Cusack and his daughter? you know exactly which one
Tahmeed:
6. Sam Peckinpah - Cross of Iron
7. George Lucas - Star Wars
8. Dario Argento - Suspiria
9. David Lynch - Eraserhead
10. Steven Spielberg - Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Brazinterma:
Song:
1. "Nobody Does It Better" - The Spy Who Loved Me
2. "New York, New York" - New York, New York
3. "Stayin' Alive" - Saturday Night Fever
4. "If I Can't Have You" - Saturday Night Fever
5. "How Deep Is Your Love" - Saturday Night Fever
6. "The Greatest Love of All" - The Greatest
7. "It's Not Easy" - Pete's Dragon
Score:
6. Sorcerer
7. The Duellists
Poster:
1. Sorcerer
2. Cross of Iron
3. Close Encounters of the The Third Kind
4. That Obscure Object of Desire (Lips)
5. Eraserhead
6. Stroszek
7. Star Wars
Editing:
1. Star Wars
2. Sorcerer
3. The Duellists
4. A Bridge Too Far
5. The American Friend
6. The Suspiria
7. The Ascent
Adapted:
6. An Average Little Man
7. A Bridge Too far
Original:
6. Star Wars
7. A Special Day
Ensemble:
1. Cross of Iron
2. The American Friend
3. 3 Women
4. A Bridge Too Far
5. The Duellists
6. The Late Show
7. Iphigenia
SPOILERS FOR 1408
Tim: Probably what surprised me the most about the movie is scenes like that. It's a great scene that has a tremendous emotional power and adds a gravity to what we're seeing beyond just "spooky". Cusack is actually amazing in the scene as we see everything he's been holding onto the whole movie come out in full force and it's absolutely devastating and I would say is one of his best acted scenes ever for sure.
Regarding Brothers, all over the place and a great example of how *not* to balance drama and comedy. The swings will give you whiplash, but worse is they just make neither tone work particularly well. This is despite most of the actors trying desperately to make it work, even Brendan Fraser, though his performance works the least, but he's trying to sell the way broader comedy his character's in than what Dinklage and Brolin are in. The latter I will also give the most credit for keeping his head up even in the most atrocious scenes (the CGI Orangutan being especially egregious). This is one where the theoretical ingredients probably could've made an enjoyable comedy, but they are cooked together horribly.
Brolin - 4
Dinklage - 3.5
Tomei - 2.5
Paige - 2.5
Close - 3
Fraser - 2
Walsh - 3
Louis: Thoughts on Myagkov in Office Romance and thoughts on the Female performances.
Luke: Hold your horses, I'm sure he'll get to those once he's caught up on the other comments.
Tony: My Apologies, a lapse of judgment.
Regarding Woman of the Hour, I honestly I found the "hook" the least effective aspect of the film. The hook being the serial killer on the dating game. I see what the script is trying to do to create this tapestry of sexist culture aiding and abetting the misogynistic serial killer, honestly though the writing lays it on a little too thick in that regard, though Kendrick delivers an endearing performance that elevates those scenes. Speaking of Kendrick, even though the script isn't amazing this is an impressive debut that lacks the common over-direction of first time actor's turned directors. She truly elevates the murder sequences that are especially disturbing by the calm and restraint she shows with them, giving them this particularly eerie normality, with one moment in the opening sequence being especially disturbing.
Kendrick - 4
Robinson - 3.5
Hale - 2
Gallagher - 3
Holmes - 2
Best - 4
Luke:
Duvall & Spacek - (Both give absolutely fascinating performances that are high wire acts yet also feel completely effortless. Duvall's performance in the early half of the crafts a fascinating kind of charisma where she exudes this vibrant personality, and a consistent confidence. What she delivers so brilliantly is the way she is able to portray this confidence in a way that feels completely false yet is entirely convincing within herself. In that there is the internalized confidence as she talks so directly to everyone and is without any hesitation in her approach. This is contrast to Spcaek who is a ball of insecurities which she portrays so wonderfully in making it such an intensity within her very being that she kind of just maneuvers a given scene in a way that is so unique yet never feels forced for Spacek. She conveys this kind of immediate sense of trying to discover or connect in her way of going around from one moment to another. Creating this fearfulness but also almost a kind of playfulness at the same time that is captivating to watch. Particularly in contrast to Duvall, who too is fascinating though in the way she sets up that confidence that we see that is alienating in a way in showing the way she is so such her own, and we see the way everyone else ignores or is passively dismissive towards her. Duvall's performance is fascinating in this section in the exact nature of her work where the consistent quality is what makes her so uniquely captivating. Which would be enough to be already fascinating but the film progresses where after we find out her confidence isn't quite respected by the rest of her world, we see that slowly reveal what's going on beneath that. Duvall shows it to be the delusion which in a way strengthens her intensity of the delusion but reveals more of genuine emotional desperation that is so striking as we see her real vulnerability. Contrasting that is Spacek who seems to become obsessed with Duvall, and Spacek is amazing in the way she is able to be both empathetic yet also alienating herself by pushing between genuine interest of wanting to fit where her sensitivity is moving, but also tips it to obsession. The first switch is fascinating where we see both fall into a state of desperation by both actresses so powerfully. Then we have this switch where Duvall opens up her performance as her character goes beyond self-pity to empathetic care towards her roommate. And it is amazing how Duvall so much brings you into her now as the lead you emphasize with meanwhile Spacek switches fascinatingly to this confident performance with one particularly bizarre yet utterly brilliant moment involving a laugh that I love beyond belief. And there is such a power to see the two contrasting and coming together in separate ways as each plays around the emotional and stylistic range even, flawlessly, while being each utterly captivating.)
BRAZINTERMA: Just out of curiosity, may I ask why you always look to get his top 7 in those categories, rather than a full top 10?
Louis: Pleasantly surprised that We Live in Time is doing so well, If I had actually cast a dream romantic film, it actually would be Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh in the two leads.
Louis: You reckon they could have had an Oscar contender if they remade Love Story with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh?
Tony: For me, seven is the perfect number. It's not too little, and it's not too much.
But if you think it's too little, then I'll start asking for a Top 10.
Luke:
Rowlands - (Her performance is a fascinating contrast to her work in Woman Under the Influence in its kind of in a way almost working towards that kind of extreme though rather than being an innate feature is something that is worked towards through acting...obviously but what Rowlands does here is act herself while acting as the character. It is an incredible performance in the way she is able to bend between the styles featured in the character because she goes from just this blunt frustration with her aging state and her existence within the theater world, she seems contemplative with the death of the seeming fan that haunts her though this goes beyond reality to existential contemplation where reality blurs and of course where reality purposefully blurs in her trying to find a way to her performance in her new play. Rowlands is great in the way she is able to thrive in either of these notes and kind of shift on a dime in a way that unsettles you though in a good way. As Rowlands is often the guide into each type of scene by making that shift and showing you the way into it through her performance that is a whole lot and always captivating.)
Mercure - (Wonderfully sympathetic work where she brings such a naturally endearing quality that manages to spread charm in every moment she has on screen despite never moving beyond the confines of the expectation of the "wife" role of the film's setting. I will say maybe this is the film's fault because you kind of go "she's so wonderful why is he such a jerk?". But I won't fault someone for coming off too well and just appreciate what she does, as she does in a way bring it forth more overtly through the journey of the film. Not that she's ever repressed but what she is able to convey is this ability to show that when she isn't burdened by every responsibility under the sun the fun loving person completely comes forth ready to have fun and inspire her husband. She is just a joy to watch and again glows throughout the film that entirely elevates the piece, even if in a way it makes her onscreen husband look even more of a dolt.)
Huppert - (What she is able to do is just create this arc so tangibly from the meek virgin girl who slowly changes and hardens through the central romance that doesn't entirely work out. She just punctuates her performance with this consistent honesty, bringing you into her earliest scenes of that timidness, to in a way grow towards the Huppert we're more familiar with as the film proceeds, however making this remarkable impact by showing the age go throughout the film. The specific age is not of obvious visual progression but rather just the adjustments of someone learning harsh truths of life.)
Keaton - (Elevates the film consistently in playing a tricky, if not often extremely impossible part in moments. Keaton's fantastic though in the way she too conveys the age of the character throughout the sequences of the film and the character's sort of progression in her overt sexuality. Keaton never simplifies a scene being able to still naturally bring her charm, though purposefully reduced, along with a more intense fear and of course even that consistent plain, well horniness to the role. It would've been very easy to have fallen on her face multiple times in the role but Keaton always maneuvers every scene wonderfully. She always creates a reality within her own work, even when dealing with some bad co-stars or some bad material. Keaton never gets lost or phones it in. She's especially great in the final sequence and her completely genuine performance makes the scene especially horrifying.)
Freindlich - (Just a very fun performance in getting to do the Garbo Ninotchka routine in playing the stiffness to the right comical degree where she knows how to play within the deadpan to be able to thrive and adjust just enough as the film goes. Making her change feel natural within her own performance and making her switch from comedic to endearing rather moving in its own way, even as the focus stays on the more comedic elements. She is the best part of the film and makes the most of every situation because she is both convincing yet brings the humor of her character entirely into the situations as well. She is the right funny stick in the mud, the right lovely romantic partner, and even sells the misunderstanding sequence with the right balance of comedic swings with a more realistic sense of betrayal.)
Emi Grant:
Another one I can think of is De Niro in Jackie Brown, where once you notice he's playing a burn out every choice he makes suddenly makes perfect sense.
Marcus:
No major thought changes other than it is Keaton just thriving completely in honestly selling Allen's specific comedic material better than Allen himself, while also just with ease conveying the changes in Annie regarding herself and the relationship with ease.
Luke:
I already actually gave my thoughts on Myagkov mixed up his name with Tikhonov in White Bim Black Ear. The latter being a quietly moving performance though limited in scope. Brings a nice warmth though that makes his scenes with the dogs appropriately moving.
Razor:
Well Argento's direction very much is the production design and cinematography. An example of the film where the vision is so distinct that it captivates really almost entirely on just vision, given the script is honestly kind of dumb. But it's one where the direction overcomes it by utilizing almost every other element of filmmaking near peak that it makes up for the faults of the script, which thankfully just doesn't get in the way. And that being Argento's choice to make everything so lurid to the most extreme degree in terms of just how deep those colors are, how intense the style is, and how marvelously wacked out the production design is. As Argento doesn't direct for the plot he very much directs for the sequence in mind which is just by making each have multiple memorable elements. As take even the first death, as you get the striking image of the hairy arm, the captivating design of the building and the stain glass, then the choice to do the two kills between the hanging and the glass together as fascinating tapestry all framed and composed just about flawlessly. But every death, or even just "cursed" moment of the film Argento presents with such captivating choices of the extreme in a way where few films can own it in such a way that is so unforgettable.
The cinematography to add slightly just shows where one can someone take vibrancy to the next level with just how beautiful those reds are and the most red reds you've ever seen. But it doesn't stop there with the use of shadows and other colors contrasting those reds to make it all the more beautiful, where it manages to go so far in one direction that somehow it goes past too much, to be nirvana of that idea. Of course it helps that every shot is so impeccably composed with the lighting so exceptionally on point that the extreme choices regarding colors are able to thrive as they do.
The production design though is key to the whole thing where every set is dynamic and fascinating to look at. Everything is again this strange extreme in the designs yet again in a way that just somehow absolutely works because of just how beautiful they look while being just off-putting in the right way to denote that there's some kind of inherent madness to these locations. The designs are a brilliant combo where somehow there's some element of extreme complexity balanced with this simplicity, which shouldn't make sense but it does with this film. As taking a look at the wall paper that is ornate with the designs building on each other, the floor and space are then simple, allowing the whole thing to be just right and not too much after all.
Tim:
Gaslight 2020's directed by Robert Eggers:
Paula: Anya Taylor-Joy
Gregory: Robert Pattinson
Brian: Matthew MacFadyen
Nancy: Milly Alcock
The Grapes of Wrath 2020's directed by David Lowery:
Tom Joad: Jesse Plemons
Ma Joad: Kathy Bates
Pa Joad: Tommy Lee Jones
Grandpa Joad: Tom Skeritt
Grandma Joad: Ellen Burstyn
Rosasharn Joad: Victoria Pedretti
Al Joad: Toby Wallace
Jim Casy: Lewis Pullman
Muley Graves: Jimmi Simpson
RatedRStar:
I mean if it was done really well, and elevated the original material, I suppose it would be possible. You already have a much more likable leading couple for a start...but maybe we keep Tommy Lee Jones as Andrew Garfield's roommate and make no mention whatsoever why he lives with an old man.
Janda - (She brings a very specific energy of the dogged reporter that isn't exactly jaded but there is this creatine weariness less so in what she's trying to do and more so attached to the system she has to apply her trade in. Janda technically for much of the film has to be in a way a device to create the exposition of what seems to be the main narrative of the titular man, however Janda manages to always bring a sense of what the mission means to her character in each scene. She doesn't play a simple crusading, though that is an element of it, but also combined with career ambition, proof of her ability and just the curiosity for the truth. Although my favorite scene of hers is outside of the main story with her dad because she is terrific in just showing instantly that relationship but also her character who is so specifically tough the rest of the time, suddenly very much be the daughter opening up in a rather different way.)
Signoret - (I mean brings the expected kind of earthy wisdom within the decaying madame essentially, though does so in a way that never falls into obvious caricature. Signoret is an actress who frequently just seemed to say the truth, and in this film that sense is no different. She just is that truth and makes every little bit more of Rosa's past being revealed being another honest bit of her that she brings forth with such an unfussy manner that makes you get a complete sense of each aspect of who the woman is now and who she once was.)
Quinlan - 4(She's not working with an amazing film and there are times where that material does weigh on her in the wrong directions. In the hallucinations scenes quite bluntly she's less than amazing but those scenes are also quite bad anyways. When she's working with the decent material though Quinlan is rather effective in moments in portraying just the sheer emotional intensity and distraught state of the young woman being pulled apart by her mind and the treatment she's within. Quinlan finds enough of an honesty though in her progression from the most extreme violent depression and self-harm, to some semblance of solace that does feel earned in spots. I did especially like her performance in the final scene with unexpected appearances from some familiar faces, because Quinlan doesn't play the moment as "cured" rather just gives enough hope towards finding normalcy.)
BRAZINTERMA: That's okay, I'll just ask him for his #8-10 for categories I'm particularly curious about.
Louis: Is the final shot from The Duellists your next background image.
Matt: What are your ratings for the Sleepy Hollow cast. And thoughts on its Production Design and Cinematography.
Louis: Regarding the idea of Welles as Taft, curiously the man, during his time as Chief Justice, actually went through a diet and got slimmer.
Luke:
Depp-4
Ricci-3
Gambon-3.5
Richardson-2
Gough-3
Griffiths-3
McDiarmid-3
Lee-3
Jones-2.5(He's fine he just doesn't do much)
Van Dien-2.5
Pickering-2
Walken-3
The Production design and cinematography are both amazing and it would be my production design win and cinematography runner up for that year. The style IS the film really, because the script is fine but deeply flawed. What Burton and his crew are going for here is a recreation of the Hammer horror aesthetic right down to the shade of red for the blood and even some of the same actors (Lee and Gough). It works, there's a an overwhelming atmosphere of gothic horror in every set and every shot and it's the main reason the film works as well it does, and why it's such a GREAT Halloween movie.
Louis: Far be it from me to say, but if you're planning to revisit Star Wars before wrapping Supporting, could you make it the final film you watch for '77? Just think it would be a good note to end on, and nicely symbolic of the dawn of a new era in filmmaking. If you have other plans, that's fine.
With We Live in Time don't let the non-linear structure this is an old school weeper to a T. I suppose not an atrocious one, in that it definitely has some charming moments, and some moving ones when it doesn't force its hand. But it is really too reliant on its stars in a way to make a lot of the repetitious material work, where there are so many areas for a more insightful exploration that it sides steps for an easy solution, another melodramatic swing or a cutesy moment. The non-linear structure doesn't really add up to much, because the scenes don't play off each other or build off each other through the structure. Rather they remove tension since you see one switch and go, "well I guess that'll work out", to the point I wonder if just in order would've been better, even if it indeed would've shown how old hat it truly was. Which hey if you're a good old hat you can make it work, which occasionally this film does within scenes, but not consistently despite the efforts of its leads, the cinematography, and Crowley going a bit lighter with the script than say if a 70's schmaltz maker had been in charge of it.
Pugh - 4.5
Louis: Your thoughts on the casts of Brothers and Woman of the Hour?
Louis: How do you think the original choices of Oliver Reed and Michael York would have fared in The Duellists?
Louis: Thoughts on the score from The Exorcist II.
Luke:
Papmoschou - (Her performance is limited but fascinating in that limitation. Because as much as she is the center element to be sacrificed for her father, the reaction is not that of a daughter becoming horrified by what her father is doing, rather her reaction is that of a dutiful child feeling she must fulfill this act to be a proper child. Which is bizarre on its own yet within the film and her performance that is a logic that works, to make her reactions seem natural. She beams with certain pride as though she's being called down to finally make the name for herself even though that means being killed.)
Molina & Bouquet - (A bizarre situation already as the two actresses play the role and just are whatever they need to be given in the situation. Although in a way reflecting the man seeing her as this peasant conquest in a way, and therefore what she matters not just that she is desirable. And each of them have this down in seeming extremely alluring in one moment, seeming to push for that allure and lustful connection to the man, then suddenly purposeful, vindictive, hectoring and fiendish the next. Purposefully changing on a dime, just as their performances interchange in the same way that successfully creates this innate frustration of the "character" which you never seem to be able to trust.)
Liotard - (The two halves of the piece and for my measure I found her more dynamic between the two, despite being the one who doesn't sing. Her performance though is most effective in embodying more so the women's feminist movement of the period through the progression of her performance. She begins with the passive meek manner, that in each segment grows in her innate strength but also the maturity of her character to show the transitions successfully in each of the stages.)
Harper - (A unique scream queen performance, one is she doesn't scream all that much, the other is the way she almost seems to wander into every situation, being theoretically proactive but mostly just standing there watching horrible things happen. I typically like Harper though and what she does do is manage to what she can in terms of finding any nuance in some of reactions so it's not just fear, even if it is mostly fear. She creates the sense of discovery and even a few moments of heartbreak and modulates the sense of fear to not be one note. The role has very little to it but Harper manages to do what she can with it.)
Papas - (A performance that cuts through the rest of the film because she portrays one person within the situation who isn't caught within the theoretical elements of the purpose of sacrifice and sees it bluntly of the earth, just madness that will lead to her child's death. Her performance is the powerful progression of this reality within her work in contrast to her husband and even her daughter caught within their different religious favors/assumptions. Papas portrays the slow descent into the realization of just where her husband is going through such honesty in just these stages of grief from the immediate disbelief of the early scenes, then the potent heartbreak of the discovery where she makes you feel just how tremendous of a betrayal of an act is and how it tears it all apart by the end. She is heartbreaking in showing this way she loses her composure in her moment of trying to stop the madness in front of her then being unable to do so. Then her final frame is just outstanding work where she doesn't need to say a thing just in her performance. You see the still internalized devastation but now combined with this resolution of action for revenge for this devastation. While the film doesn't go into the vengeance after this choice by Agemenmon, Papas shows you that resolution just in her eyes where you see the ferocity of her anger and conviction in her choice despite the film leaving it at that.)
Rigg - (The performer who most seems to get the idea that a staged musical needs to be, you know, maybe a little bit of fun, and maybe a bit more alive. Because Rigg, unlike the majority of the cast who are out of their comfort zones in one way or another, Rigg is wholly within her comfort and just thrives with it. There is no hesitation or loss of cinematic magic from her as she runs with the role in portraying the very particular nature of the woman who both is very whole in her dominating manner yet it technically in a state of brokenness by what she allows her husband to do. Rigg in this way thrives by coming at every scene with this specific knowing energy of someone who knows they're playing a game and plays the game with a certain delight. But she does naturally temper this with moments of nuance that do allude to her certain honest vulnerability within the situation, to easily give the one performance that manages to make her character cinematic...which honestly should've been easy given the musicals are rooted in a cinematic film)
Ullmann - (As per usual Ullmann is great even in a film where it wavers more than a little. Ullmann though is consistently moving in portraying the emotional state of her character's struggle so vividly as we follow her through every hardship and every moment of potential hope. She's especially great in her scene with Whitmore where we see a brief respite in her terrible state. And that is perhaps what is so powerful in Ullmann work because as much as we get a real sense of the mental rot of her character that eventually combined with physical in dealing with her world that only seems to become more oppressive over time, Ullman brings that glimmer of hope that makes it all the more heartbreaking.)
8000's:
Well Chief Justice is the far less stressful job.
Tony:
Reed would've been great and ideally cast. York I'm less convinced by, who I don't think quite has the innately likability or average man quality that Carradine brings. I don't think he would've been terrible but would've been less ideal.
Jonathan:
Terrible film obviously but Regan's theme is one of the Morricone compositions, and one can easily appreciate that Tarantino decided to use it in a much better film. The film is of course all over the place, however Morricone's work with that piece has this spiritualistic beauty to it with this emphasis on kind of the escape from the horrors of the past to move on from it. The use of the rising choir with the instruments is particularly beautiful. Although Regan's theme is the highlight, there are some other pieces that evoke kind of a The Thing esque eeriness with the layering of unnatural choices of instrumentation but with Morricone's melodic ability holding it together. In fact you can kind of sense that Morricone is probably just playing around a bit as though Boorman gave him no precise direction. So you get almost a rock theme with Pazuzu, you get more eerie horror with Rite of Magic, then again classic Morricone beauty with Interrupted Melody. He's very much experimenting which speaks to Morricone's talent that he achieves greatness here within obviously a very bad film.
Louis: Thoughts on The Simpsons' Homer Loves Flanders and Frasier's Look Before You Leap?
Louis: When you analyze Schell, could you also talk about Coburn?
Louis: thoughts on the trailer for The Brutalist?
Luke:
Blondell - (Kind of a fascinating bit of casting in itself by having an old school Hollywood performer with Cassavetes's style, and Blondell does not seem at all lost. In fact she's wholly capable in terms of being able to be part of the rather caustic and purposefully clashing scenes. Blondell's performance manages to do both in terms of having a distinct presence by very much being this old school presence in the more direct nature of her performance that doesn't seem burdened in the same way as Rowlands. But she is able to match that heightened emotional intensity the moments where we see her character become frustrated by it. She creates an effective balance in still bringing that quality of the past, but updating it naturally that manages to be an ideal of both worlds.)
Fossey - (Found her more interesting than the man she is studying bringing the right sort of balance of tone within her performance between a degree of more passive fascination with almost a certain comedic quality strewn into being maybe slightly baffled by at the same time. Her performance I consistently found brought the most depth to the proceedings and managed to maybe even give our a leading man a bit more interest through the way she creates her own investment into him.)
Rule - (The calm superego of the piece, who is essential to the film though her performance within the overall scheme of the film is far more limited by design given she is mute for much of it and just this seemingly passive though distinctive presence. Her couple breaks though are pivotal and well performed by Rule that do cut through those key moments as though truly taking action suddenly to force this regulation/realignment and makes her brief but notable impact each time.)
Nemolyaeva - (Ends up making less of an impact than is the expectation in portraying seemingly the friendly co-conspirator at the first however every time we check in with her it is this sad progression of her failed attempts to woo the new person. Something she approaches with comedy at first but the longer it goes the more the desperation becomes overt and is effective in this, even if the resolution for her character is fairly limited.)
Andersson - (Expectedly does well in the role of the caring psychiatrist who is the one person seeming to offer some kind of positive path for her patient. Her performance is limited in terms of how much she as a character is explored but Andersson finds the right combination between this sense of obvious warmth and empathy combined with this clear dogged conviction to at times be clear in her intention and never lie to her patient.)
Valli - (An entertaining scream queen performance where much of her performance is indeed just doing that screaming and becoming fearful while also occasionally curious. That is enough but she also gets to have fun in the end being her own deranged work as a killer where she has the right kind of devilish intensity with that moment as well.)
Caron - (Was a little surprised to see her show up, though she is quite effective in her role regardless. As she manages to create an immediate sense of the history of their relationship by mixing in the sense of attraction the potential for love at one time, but also the frustration in the interaction to create the sense of their romance that had ended some time ago.)
Sidney & Tyrell - (Both are just there to be viscerally insane in slightly different ways, but both are quite effective in doing so. And that is where the film is successful in that they bring this insanity without overplaying it which easily could've been the case. And while this isn't Cuckoos's Nest, you could see Tyrell and Sidney working in a women's version of that story by the way that delivers that specific intensity here without going over the top.)
Bennett - (I would say unlike the aforementioned performance by Blondell, she really doesn't entirely fit however it ends up working regardless by being this stodgy somewhat annoyed presence, that gives her a somewhat comical presence, if perhaps unintentional, though works in being this business side of the dance company who seems to just be annoyed by the process.)
RIP Dick Pope
Anonymous:
Brolin - (He basically gets the job done and I liked that he wasn't playing the dolt suggested by the trailer. Rather he's the exasperated straight man which Brolin runs with...at least as far as the script will allow him to go. He brings the right honesty to the role consistently to be even moving and skirt through the bad jokes in the film. I will give him particular credit for getting through a particularly horrendous scene involving the Orangutan with his dignity intact which is no small feat.)
Dinklage - (I will say see more of Dinklage there is a slight tendency by him to fall onto some old familiars when it comes to his performances, particularly the tensed lip side eye. And you get some of that here. Having said that, he's like Brolin here but doesn't get as much out of the material, though like Brolin he manages to not get pulled down by it.)
Tomei - (She's in it, really doesn't make any use of her talents.)
Paige - (Also in it.)
Close - (Fine makeup job, though I'm not entirely sure why. She's fine overall but the film is too inconsistent with its choices with her character to really get to something.)
Fraser - (With better direction this performance might've worked as he's all intensity all the time, but the film doesn't know what to do with it so Fraser is just a whole lot and honestly too much without being funny unfortunately.)
Walsh - (Not much of a role but it was nice to see him one more time.)
Kendrick - (More or less doing her thing, but a good example of it. Bringing an innate charm to the role to make you care and knowing how to modulate in her one dramatic scene to add nicely to the tension of the moment.)
Robinson - (A moving portrayal of her ptsd that segues effectively to heartbroken frustration as she finds no one to actually help her in the desperate state she does bring to life in a very vivid way.)
Hale - (Just an over the top performance, that is full caricature and makes the point of his role a little too obviously without being funny either.)
Holmes - (Yeah odd choice in every way shape and form. Just a sore thumb that seems completely out of place every second he's onscreen and just is a poor fit here.)
Gallagher - (Effective realistic work that adds to the horror of the moment.)
Best - (Wish there had been more of her as she's honestly amazing in her final sequences especially because she is able to be so specific in creating the sense of complete internalized horror, and trauma, while also creating this sort of false face of sincerity in trying to assuage her tormentor, that she makes totally believable while also completely heartbreaking.)
Tony:
Homer loves Flanders is an absolutely amazing episode that doesn't disappoint as he breaks one of the essential truths of the early show "Homer hating Flanders" in first a way that is believable then which proceeds to spiral hilariously out of control. From the reverse happening, as Homer grates on Flanders, to becoming the terminator wanting to hang out with the chase being an highlight, to Bart and Lisa's meta commentary, to Flanders's rather brutal dream and of course Grandpa Simpson wanting to sacrifice Flanders to "our God". All hilarious but also great is the genuinely heartfelt moment of Homer's defense of Flanders, with an appropriate retconned conclusion that is meta in just the right way.
I'll admit I don't remember "Leap" extremely well, other than the memorable ending of Frasier's butchering of "Buttons and Bows" that is proper climax.
Anonymous:
The Brutalist looks amazing from that trailer, and loved the trailer itself of just being a pure mood piece that doesn't say much about it. Already was heavily anticipating it, this just confirms those feelings.
RIP Dick Pope, sad to see Hard Truths turn into his swan song, but certainly looking forward to it.
RIP Dick Pope
RIP Dick Pope
Louis: Is Zovatto supporting in Woman of the Hour?
Matt:
He's unquestionably lead, Kendrick's on the border but lead to me.
Hans Zimmer's Dune 2 score is ineligible for Oscars because it reuses too much music from the first film.
And yet it seems like a John Williams franchise score has never been disqualified.
Louis: Due to this unfortunate turn of events, can I have thoughts on Zimmer's score.
RIP Dick Pope
R.I.P. Dick Pope
thoughts on the trailer of Love Hurts?
Luke:
Baffling decision I will say first off with all the times Williams has been nominated for scores that reuse so much of his music. And yes Zimmer does reuse parts of his score but even then he doesn't just do simple reuse such as in the worm ride he takes elements of the score in terms of the themes and expands them in different ways in expressing Paul's journey, by adding layering to themes or rearranging them wholly. But it also features the gorgeous plenty of new particularly the leitmotif of essentially the seeming "love" theme, that is a spectacular bit of work in terms of Zimmer melding together more of the dissonate tracks of the original to something that is more overtly soulful and most powerful.
Tim:
Eh, I'm glad Quan is getting a leading role after his Oscar win, but looks like a generic John Wick ripoff of the John Wick pseudo ripoff Nobody (Pseudo because the writer was ripping himself off) outside of what Quan is doing in the trailer.
Louis: What are your thoughts on Marcel Sabourin in J.A. Martin Photographer and Jack Lemmon in Airport '77?
Louis: Thoughts on September 5 trailer.
Louis: Your ratings and thoughts on Sarah Paulson & David Hyde Pierce in Down With Love.
Also, your 1960s cast & director for that film?
Louis, what would be your thoughts and ratings on these performances? If you've given them before, I couldn't find them.
Olivia Williams, Rushmore
Joanna Gleason, Boogie Nights
Lindsay Crouse, The Verdict
Louis: Thoughts on Sonny and Michael's last dinner together from the first Godfather?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efMQRfmrlA0&ab_channel=VitezslavVojacek
Louis: Thoughts on this scrapped song from The Jungle Book?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P1eTUb48zgA&pp=ygUaanVuZ2xlIGJvb2sgbWlnaHR5IGh1bnRlcnM%3D
Conclave is a largely a compelling thriller version of the Two Popes albeit kind of ridiculous with the amount of melodramatic swings. But if you can accept it as this "all is revealed" thriller narrative where one string must be pulled back after another to find the truth, it works by the able function of filmmaking that essentially maintains pace and has a certain conviction to itself that chooses to handle the melodrama by just trying to be fairly low key and emotionally honest about it, rather than either playing directly into it by going fully over the top or subverting it through humor. Partially through just granting time to voice the perspective of the different sides on the ideological level to give some substance to the power players and to properly explore the process through our protagonist needing to take it all in on an emotional level. And while I'll say there is something within the eventual reveals that basically suggests no one had any agency within the whole process that does make me maybe like the whole film a bit less, not enough to not say I did enjoy it even in its imperfect existence.
Lithgow - 3
Castellitto - 3.5
Rossellini - 4
Msamati - 3.5
Diehz - 3.5
O'Byrne - 3.5
Lucas:
Sabourin - (His performance isn't bad, in that he's convincing from scene to scene and the general emotions are believable. He's completely charmless though the past that I think was even the intention and there is no natural growth to becoming likable. It just is said to happen more than we see him truly see him convey that in his performance. While the character was already tricky, and he's not truly bad, he doesn't bring any innate likability that would've helped the role alonga bit.)
Lemmon - (Lemmon is giving it his all in every respect no matter how tired some of the material might be. Lemmon brings dogged conviction to all of it. Whether it be his hesitating romance where Lemmon expertly navigates with an unforced sincerity. Or the actual disaster scenes where he keeps such a potent sense of the severity of the situation with the right emotional pressure but also conviction with survival and a bit appropriate anger for the causers of the situation. Lemmon delivers a performance that sells every moment of the film, and to his credit does elevate the whole thing thanks to his presence.)
Bryan:
Honestly I don't remember Paulson all that well. I liked Pierce however who very much understood the assignment in playing the part as Tony Randall's likely part in the version, and brings a bit of his Frasier comic manner to the role, though I wouldn't quite put it on the height of his best work from the show. It is an enjoyable rendition regardless.
Well the cast would just be the cast from Pillow Talk and directed by Michael Gordon given the film is essentially a remake of that film, just with the tongue slightly more in the cheek (it isn't as though Pillow Talk is taking itself seriously either)
Tony:
Thinking about it, maybe Williams is why I don't love the film as many do, not that I think she even gives a bad performance, as this point of affection for both the older businessman and Max. In terms of the basic intellectual allure that makes her appealing to the men and portrays that convincingly. I guess where I'm less inspired by her performance is there is this degree of vagueness, that for me feels vague rather than artfully ambiguous in terms of her actual concerns with either the old man or the "boy".
Gleason's performance is one depicting only such an extreme emotion, an emotion that is by its very nature uncomfortable which is this very authentic feeling of domestic abuse quality where not only is she loud, unpleasant and severe, she also has this point of desperation within all of her work that is most unnerving. Obviously there's not more to it than that note, but she does portray that note effectively...maybe all too effectively in terms of making not a scene I particularly like to revisit unless watching the film through.
Crouse is great, and I ponder if The Verdict failed to get a nomination due to the "best scene" of Crouse, versus the larger role of Rampling leading neither to find momentum. Anyway, my favorite scene in the film is Mason crosseximination of her and that is in part due to both her performance and Mason's. She has her initial scene where her reaction to Newman's request already creates the immediate sense of someone being traumatized just to have to remember and being frankly scared by the notion. Then in the courtroom scene it is one all about the build of her performance towards the truth of the matter. As she begins to basically unravel it with an emotional sense to each portion of the past. As she begins with the matter of fact information about the doctor, but when the true crime comes in, we see the first hesitation that carries with it so much weight explaining her switching out the numbers for the doctor which she combines with complicity, shame, but also heartbreak for the patient. When pressed though Crouse shows this sadness to not be solely the emotion but ferocity of her years of frustration and righteous anger as she explains what the doctors forced her to do. So eloquently building the moments of anger of the "they lied" first, then the final explosion at anger, that she brings so much to because it isn't just that crime but shattering her whole life as she knew it. Crouse finds such a sense of the tremendous degree of that heartbreak with her "I wanted to be a nurse" that is devastating yet also so powerful with the "who were these men" where there is such just power to those words.
Anonymous:
A great scene that lives on the procedure, which is kind of the attention to detail that can make a film that much better and that is an example of such. Where we get such a sense of the guys just waiting together doing any old business as they run ideas and construct the plot for Michael's job. But what's more though is the final moment between the brothers, that ends up being their final moment together, because you see Sonny in that moment as purely the older brother and Michael for the last time, in a truly loving caring relationship, even in brevity you get the purest sense of it in that moment, as every word from Sonny is comfort and protection as he wants his kid brother to be okay and senses the danger in it.
Ytrewq:
I see more potential in it than the song itself which has some compelling lyrics in the hunter and Khan both talking about the same thing though as opponents. The musical execution though is very labored and not particularly interesting as it just makes go on and on and doesn't really evolve or advance the duel in a way. I could see this general idea, with the lyrics working but needed improvement in terms of the musical design.
Jonathan Williams:
I'll say the trailer got more interesting as it went, as just depicting the events would've been one thing but the extra wrinkle on the journalistic ethics of the tv crew choosing how to cover it maybe will give it a different avenue from how the events were covered in Munich.
Louis: thoughts on the cast of Conclave, and what are your predictions for its Oscar prospects now that you've seen it?
Louis: "I guess where I'm less inspired by her performance is there is this degree of vagueness, that for me feels vague rather than artfully ambiguous in terms of her actual concerns with either the old man or the "boy"."
By "actual concerns", are you referring to what she sees in Blume, and why she keeps being friends with Max? And do you put that more on Williams's shoulders, or Anderson's?
Conclave is 100 percent losing all or most of his Oscar nominations, it is literally the classic film that gets about 5 or 6 nominations and loses all of them, it literally cannot win anything other than Best Actor.
Louis: I wonder how close Tom Skeritt was to getting nominated for The Turning Point? it certainly would have been an improvement.
Calvin:
Lithgow - (Basically what you expect him to do, maybe to a fault, though it doesn't help that his character lacks really any ideological viewpoint and just exists around a plotpoint instead. Lithgow soldiers through it but it lacks something more substantial for him to grasp onto.)
Castellitto - (I liked him more in his early scenes of just shit eating grin and the more subtle indications of his nature as he side eyes the moments that push the narrative in his direction. His big scene I think he delivers well, though I think for the film's narrative it makes things a little too "easy" though that's not on him.)
Rossellini - (Really a very underwritten part that requires many blanks to be filled in...but to Rossellini's credit I thought she managed to largely do so. Because her actions as written just kind of happen, however Rossellini does absolutely everything she can in these assertive silences and makes the most of her one big moment she does give in just bringing this matter of fact directness that made a remarkable impact for really a character who only exists to forward the plot.)
Msamati - (Again does what he can in bringing the genuine emotion to his key scene where I did like how he made the heartbreak within his character very real albeit with a very human imperfection within his anguish.)
Diehz - (I think Diehz does a fine job of bringing this graciousness to the character and genuine piety without overdoing it. Although in contrast to Castellitto his speech to I felt a touch to on the nose and maybe his performance too ideal, though again more goes to my criticism of making it all too easy despite the final wrinkle of the film, which I didn't love or hate, I think it definitely needed more time than it is given without the easy out it is given. Regardless, Diehz is effective at the moment in just being very honest and presenting this honesty.)
O'Byrne - (Delivers all his dramatic exposition most effectively.)
I'll admit having seen it feels harder to be objective, as it seems I'm probably lower on the film than most seem to be. But even before seeing it, I thought it likely to be a secondary contender, where it gets plenty of nominations but never feels in contention to win best picture. So I see the Picture, Score, Screenplay, Actor and maybe editing. Tucci and Rossellini are both possible though the film will need to maintain momentum for you, and sort of the non-major player possibilities in their character can't get footholds either. Berger I think might get DGA but gets left off on the final five...unless the director's branch wants to make up for his theoretical snub for All Quiet.
In terms of wins, Adapted Screenplay is certainly doable as it has the traits of a screenplay winner. Fiennes I feel confident will finally end his far too long nomination absence, but the win might be a tougher task as he would be the most subtle winner since...well Murphy but without playing a real person. It helps though that everyone has a potential knock against them though. Chalamet is still super young and his film might not be a contender. Craig's definitely doesn't seem like it will be a contender. Domingo's film might be losing momentum. Stan is competing with himself. And Brody seems like he might have the most glowing praise, and maybe can pull a Zellweger but would be a very unexpected two time winner.
Tony:
Yes that is what I am referring to. I think that is mostly Anderson who leaves kind of a blank there, but also to a degree on Williams who doesn't feel in the blank in my mind, like say in the way I was referring to with Rossellini in Conclave.
RatedRStar:
Probably not all that close despite the NBR win. Seeing the Globe nod, I think all focus was on the then very much hyped Baryshnikov and voters gave into the gimmick. And worth noting that was a year where the Globe nods and Oscar nods were exactly the same, so the five seemed weirdly set there.
Louis: What would your ratings be for the above 3 performances?
And have you settled on thoughts and ratings for the Megalopolis cast?
Louis given Conclave seems to be yet another at least partial disappointment for you, do you think 2024 is a weak year for you?
Tony:
3 for Williams, 3.5 for Gleason, 4.5 for Crouse.
Driver - 2.5(Sadly "go back to the club" is the most interesting part of this performance. The rest of the time I found Driver struggling to find some kind of tone to bridge all the concepts this film is going for but just doesn't find a path. Which to his credit he managed to do before this film, but this time around he feels as lost as anyone else. He struggles to realize whatever the character is supposed to be, probably Coppola doesn't even know, as is he supposed to be inspiring? Mad? Condescending? Rebellious? I don't know, but he just seems lost to me.)
Esposito - 2.5(Feel bad as he tries to offer some kind of consistency and honesty through just completely ridiculous lines and emotional swings he can't sell. He tries but just gets lost in the same way as Driver.)
Emmanuel - 1.5(Like the previous two tries to be sincere, which is a mistake but is a less talented actor in general than those two so she seems even more awkward and ridiculous. She unfortunately just feels extremely stiff which with the dialogue she's saddled with she becomes even stiffer.)
Plaza - 4.5(Should not be watched out of context as you must be in the madness of the film to fully appreciate her work unless it is the "Auntie Wow" scene which should be watched...uh for research purposes. Anyway, Plaza manages to stay above board by just embracing the insanity for all its worth even the scene where she's kneeling before Driver's multiple faces, and I have no clue what is going on in the scene, I still bought Plaza's approach. She's mad and she's entertaining as such and something you can cling to by having fun with the wildness of her role. It's ridiculous melodrama which Plaza completely owns from scene to scene, playing the obvious sexpot manipulator for every moment of ridiculousness with her own ridiculousness but in a way that does work.)
LaBeouf - 3.5(Like Plaza he too goes for just being completely ridiculous which fits the ridiculous film. I'd say he is generally not as entertaining as her for much of the film, until her teams up with her and then Plaza ups LaBeouf's game of ridiculousness to also be entertaining.)
Voight - 2.5(I mean he's supposed to seem lost I guess, but he mostly just seems lost for most of the film. I guess except for his hilarious final scene, which the level of intentionality of that scene is up for debate, though Voight does come to life in the moment to make me not go lower.)
Fishburne - 2.5(Tries to bring this gravitas but all his readings come off sounding almost like he is selling a car then any genuine concepts or films. Fishburne ends up sadly not working despite playing it straight and with conviction, however again in the wrong place.)
Shire - 3(I did enjoy her "my son sucks" no matter what delivery for every moment, especially at the end, which again the writing is pretty terrible her reactions I found amusing regardless.)
Anonymous:
So far, yeah.
Louis: are you saving Izaac Wang in Dìdi?
Louis: If you're looking for a Despecialized Star Wars, Google Project 4K77.
Lucas:
Yes.
Robert:
Thanks.
Luke: As of now, who do you predict to win the Lead and Supporting Actor overall rankings for 2024.
Glenn: For Lead Actor, Brody or Stan (A Different Man). I could see MacKay and Craig making top 5 and Fiennes' hopes have evaporated (He's getting a 4.5).
For Supporting Actor, I don't see anyone aside from Dafoe (Nosferatu) or Pearce taking it.
Louis: Have there been specific instances where as you're writing about a performance in a review, you decided to upgrade them to a 5? Or are the ratings always finalized by the time you start writing the review?
Marcus:
There actually have been instances where I've started giving brief thoughts on a performance and said to myself "this deserves a full review" such as Simon Rex in Red Rocket and actually Hoult in Fury Road. But in terms of full reviews, that has certainly happened and the rating isn't fixed. In fact part of the review allows me to reflect more closely on the performance and sometimes notice things I did not beforehand.
Louis: Have you been watching The Franchise on HBO?
RIP Teri Garr :(
RIP Teri Garr
RIP Teri Garr.
Louis: Since I know you used to watch Letterman...did you ever happen to catch his final show montage, with the Foo Fighters performing "Everlong"? If so, could I have your thoughts on it?
RIP Teri Garr
RIP Teri Garr
Lucas:
Watched the first episode, although I enjoyed a couple jokes didn't love its comedic rhythm on the whole.
Tahmeed:
No I have not seen that.
Small Things Like These is a rare type of film where I entirely liked everything about it, I just wish there had been more of it, particularly as the ending feels ripe for a third act with much potential, but instead it ends with just the decision rather than following through on the fallout of said decision. Having said that, it has such a tremendous sense of place and atmosphere. One of those films where you really sense the cold of the air, the smell of dirt or grime in certain moments. Has a tremendous sense of ease in the way it gives out its information and adds its moments of tension through, fittingly the small things we see that reveal themselves in the narrative. Although the plot will make you believe it is solely an alternative perspective on a man seeing the injustice of The Magdalene Sisters, it isn't only that, as instead it is an intimate portrait of a passive man examining his existence closely, and it is in those details where the power of the film does exist. Because you do feel very much within this man's life, in his mind and in his inaction. And while I wouldn't have minded further exploration of this, I was entirely invested in what we were granted.
Walsh - 3.5
Fairley - 3
Watson - 4.5
Behan - 3.5
RIP Teri Garr. The entire cast of Young Frankenstein is gone now and that makes me sad.
Matt:
The Blind Man would like a word with you. He was going to make Espresso.
Totally spaced on Hackman
R.I.P. Teri Garr
Louis: Your past roles for Sharlto Copley, Nick Offerman and Bill Camp?
Anonymous: He covered Copley’s past film roles in this page.
actoroscar.blogspot.com/2019/02/alternate-best-actor-2013.html?m=1
Louis, your thoughts on Treehouse of Horror X? And what are your top 10 Halloween-themed TV episodes/specials?
Louis: Your casts for Curtiz and Kurosawa directed versions of the Three Musketeers.
Anonymous:
Nick Offerman:
Theodore Roosevelt (The Wind and the Lion)
Captain Morton (Mister Roberts)
Whiplash Willie Gingrich
Bill Camp:
Big Daddy
Juror #3
Sergeant Moretti
Tony:
Where you see the the limitations and they are less trying to tell a complete story and just whatever needs to be done. The first is probably the best as it is a full story of building towards the somewhat random reveal. Boosted by some good jokes, fog run, Homer's willingness to murder Milhouse and Moe's "accidental" call to Maude being particular highlights.
Xena is pretty random with only the occasional joke that works all that well, namely "I'm not Xena I'm Lucy Lawless" to explain her random powers.
Don't really care for Life's a Glitch, as it indicates completely callous Homer, in turn completely callous Lisa when choosing between parents and then a needlessly dark ending. Although I suppose I enjoy Pauly Shore's eagerness to get a tan on the sun and the degree in which Tom Arnold was willing to make fun of himself. Though I'll say, while I often criticize Spike Lee's films more than some, I think his inclusion on the B-grade ship isn't warranted.
Simpsons Early Treehouse of Horrors (Would basically take up the whole list if I included them all)
"Halloween" - Frasier
Pinkeye - South Park
Spookyfish - South Park
A Nightmare on Face Time - South Park
Who Got Dee Pregnant - It's Always Sunny
It's the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown
And Then There Was Shawn - Boy Meets World (Which is probably the only episode I remember of the show clearly)
Garfield's Halloween
8000's:
Curtiz:
Athos: Ronald Colman
Porthos: Thomas Gomez
Aramis: Errol Flynn
D'Artagnan: Robert Walker
MIlady de Winter: Ingrid Bergman
Rochefort: Basil Rathbone
Constance Bonacieux: Elizabeth Taylor
Cardinal Richelieu: Claude Rains
Kurosawa:
Athos: Masayuki Mori
Porthos: Susumu Fujita
Aramis: Toshiro Mifune
D'Artagnan: Tatsuya Nakadai
MIlady de Winter: Kinuyo Tanaka
Rochefort: Tsutomu Yamazaki
Constance Bonacieux: Kyoko Kagawa
Cardinal Richelieu: Takashi Shimura
Louis: I watched The Thing today for the first time, so I'll ask this: how do you think Offerman would've fared as Blair?
Ytrewq: Oh that's interesting.
Louis: Do you intend to see Wolf Hall: The Mirror And The Light in November or will you be waiting for the American release in March.
Ytrewq:
Honestly that sounds like ideal casting.
Luke:
I'll probably watch it as soon as I am able to.
Post a Comment