Erland Josephson did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Alexander in The Sacrifice.
The Sacrifice defies simple description however follows a former actor and writer in his seemingly isolated house surrounded by his family.
The Sacrifice in some ways is Tarkovsky's version of a Ingmar Bergman film, as we have a self-reflective character facing a crisis of faith. One obvious feature of connection is within the use of Erland Josephson, a common Bergman actor, utilized here as our main character that we follow through his unusual journey. The film begins seemingly simply enough as we find Alexander playing with his young son affectionately known as "Little man" and pondering some tale. Josephson's performance is as a seemingly largely content man in this state of being as he ponders as he does and as he interacts with his son. There is a bit of joy, but also just a relaxed quality. The man seems concerned with greater matters in what he speaks of; however Josephson's delivery even of these words isn't of immense concern rather very much this observational quality. Eventually this is interrupted by the arrival of their neighbor and mailman Otto, who gives Alexander a birthday card from friends and their conversation continues though with Otto mostly taking the lead. Again Josephson's performance is a man going through the motions of this interaction, not really in a negative way of a man weighed down by the conversation but rather just a man who exists within certain confines of living, a living that doesn't seem to break beyond a certain point. For example when asking about Alexander's relationship with God, which he replies is non-existent, isn't spoken as either a pained truth or a purposeful dismissal, just as a fact of the man's existence no more no less. The only example where we see kind of a break from that observational quality is with the little man, when he lassos the mailman's bike that causes Otto to fall in good nature. Josephson's reaction is very much the loving father which portrays a stronger connection in that moment, which is a bit different from the rest of the interaction where we see the man just observing as he does. This continues as he gathers with his wife, his step-daughter, his maid, his doctor and Otto in their house where conversations continue on various subjects, including Otto's fascination seeming with the otherworldly, and even the background of Alexander as an actor who became a critic. When speaking even of his own past, Josephson's delivery is somewhat passive, there is a history there but a history of seeming the man having a natural calm within his existence despite this purposeful choice of the past to separate himself from a craft he once cared about. Josephson's performance maintains that of the observer, even though this is the man's life that speaks of, it is in his house that Otto seems to have a minor breakdown, yet Alexander remains as he is without concern.
The strength of Josephson's performance in the early scenes is that Alexander doesn't become lost within the frame, or the other characters, despite being observational for so long. Josephson, just as he did in his earlier collaboration with Tarkovsky, manages to pull you into his work even as he supports the overall vision wholly naturally. Here Josephson carefully expresses the needed sense of history within his observing expressions, there is much the man has thought about and even his physical manner exists as someone who purposefully detaches, to the point almost seeming like a ghost in his own house. The film makes its first brilliant twist when jets are heard from above and much of the household are horrified to hear an announcement of potentially World War III starting. Something that Alexander even doesn't initially react to as strongly as others, even coming into the broadcast late, leaving the doctor to drug his hysterical wife and others as they panic over their seeming impending doom. Josephson at first still being the observer for some time till he is left with his own thoughts. During this time Josephson's performance so quietly yet potently shows the sense of building understanding and despair in the man seemingly haunted by this horror explicitly. Leading to Alexander's first act as he prays to God offering a prayer to end the horror of their situation though with an offer that he will sacrifice all that he loves if God makes the horror end. Josephson is extraordinary in this scene as he breaks that observational distance and becomes completely alive in the scene. Josephson in his deteriorating expression reveals so much pain, sorrow and existential dread, combined with in his voice this wavering hope as he speaks his prayer. There is so much power to every word, and his decaying state of emotional distance is lost and we see someone completely in contact with the idea of this horror. Josephson finds within all of this quiet yet incredibly powerful conviction as he offers his sacrifice of everything he loves, as a promise of sacrifice as a fundamental truth. It is an extraordinary scene made so by Josephson's performance that embodies this all with such tangible emotional might that is devastating to behold.
The next twist in the situation comes from Otto who suggests Alexander seek out their neighbor Maria, who he claims is a witch and that she is in some way the key to escape. Leaving Maria's with a pistol and an unknowable intention. Something that comes out within Josephson's performance that grafts onto this bizarre situation an honesty by projecting this quiet fearfulness and more so this lost quality as he seems to be seeking something from Maria, but he really doesn't know. We have yet another tremendous monologue from Josephson as he describes a "gift" he brought to his mother's garden, where he articulates with such a quiet sense of nostalgia that mixes in this sense of the past though with the uncertainty of the future. As he continues speaking of the garden though he notes how by "fixing" his mother's garden by ordering it, it removed any of the beauty from the garden. Josephson's way of losing that nostalgia and bringing out instead such painful regret filled with such a sense of what he sees as a mistake and almost a grievous act against his mother. He exudes such quiet heartbreak that is so powerful because in his delivery and his expression he builds towards such a building state of being a man utterly lost within his current dismay. Something that progresses to taking out the pistol, a moment without conviction rather Josephson plays the moment as though he has no awareness of what he is doing with it, or what he is doing here, just the potent sense of a man completely lost at this time. Something that is only broken as Maria embraces him and comforts him to the point of becoming sexual with him, a scene that only gets stranger as it proceeds because it appears as though Otto's mythical depiction of her holds more than a little credence. Something that Josephson grounds by presenting just a man completely lost in this moment, lost in this time, and lost in himself as he goes along with Maria though in a near catatonic state. Eventually Alexander awakens and the world seems to have not ended and peace to whatever extent it is has come back. Which some might take as a false alarm, but a man who had said his prayer in the way Alexander has, leaves him to go through with his sacrifice to atone. The final act of the film, Josephson doesn't really have lines and is seen largely at a distance. Yet Josephson is always captivating as we follow Alexander as he evades his family in order to set-up burning down his house with everything in it. His sneaking around is played with almost a childlike manner of not fully mischievousness yet there is a glint of it, as Josephson seems to portray some arrested state as he progresses around in his plan with a curious conviction. It isn't the emotional man speaking of his love, now it is filling some bargain with a logic only he could fully understand in the moment. When his family finally "catches" him, his reaction is of a man completely lost, though now in a new way as he reacts unintelligibly emotionally, if not even randomly, yet in Josephson's performance you do believe in this break, of the strange yet tangible journey we've seen him progress through. Josephson delivers an idiosyncratic yet tremendous performance. One that is about a few key moments verbalization combined with remarkable silences, to successfully explores a mental state that seems wholly unique, yet never feels less than universal in an emotional sense.
74 comments:
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Thoughts on the Direction and Cinematography.
RIP Marshall Brickman
Hey guys
Hey guys
Update on my Top 10 prediction of Louis' lead actor in 1986:
1. Hoskins
2. Goldblum
3. Phoenix
4. Ford
5. Auteuil (Jean de Florette)
6. Auteuil (Manon des Sources)
7. Josephson
8. Woods
9. Oldman
10. Depardieu
My Top 5 prediction of Louis' Director in 1986:
1. Lynch
2. Tarkovsky
3. Cronenberg
4. Berri
5. Stone
Louis: Thoughts on the NYFCC winners.
Louis: Your Tarkovsky ranking (perhaps excluding The Sacrifice, if you don't know where to rank it).
Louis: From what I'm hearing, the entire Nosferatu ensemble is exceptional.
Luke:
Fleetwood - 3.5(I believe dubbed for much of it, however her English breakdown scene is extremely powerful in so directly showing such vicious fear and hysteria in the moment. She doesn't hold back and depicts that level of dread powerfully. The rest of the time her theoretically silent work is fine in just presenting the ideal enough wife.)
Wolter - 3.5(His performance is a curious yet impactful juxtaposition as he seems initially this calm observer of the moment, even after the first turn we see him take action where he delivers each word with calm precision as someone who is comforting, though not in a warm way, rather taking necessary action. This in contrast to his final scene where that certain precise coldness becomes just a touch more vicious and suddenly he seems a brutal critic that keeps his doctor quietly fascinating.)
Edwall - 4(His performance is particularly enigmatic as in his first scene he just seems like a jolly postman in the sense of your side character from even a romantic comedy. Presenting just a pleasant personality no more no, less. His monologue then while visiting has this strange intensity and darkness he slowly reveals throughout, completely changing one's perspective on him to almost this own harbinger of doom even before the turn. After the turn though his manner takes one more step to be a direct messenger of some mission to Alexander, which is enigmatic but also you sense some strange conviction even as he suggests some completely insane method to "save the world".)
Gísladóttir - 4(Speaking of enigmatic, no performance is more enigmatic than hers, however as we initially meet her she just seems to be a somewhat shy retiring neighbor. When Alexander goes to her house, her performance continues to be fascinating within the mystery that slowly unveils itself towards this warmth and empathy despite what is claimed about her. However her final moments are still so simple and she plays with the precise method curiously yet never does she feel just vague.)
Tarkovsky's direction has some of his common traits such as the long wandering takes which again despite being naturalistic particularly in the blocking of the actors, yet is so precise in the way the scene unveils itself. It is a hypocrisy that never feels as such and is just an aspect of the genius here. The choice in location to create this stark area where the house stands out as this singular bastion in the landscape, but within also is then isolating within. Something that becomes all the more intense when Tarkosky's hand becomes more precise in his choice of creating the doom, which the choices in sound and lighting are just incredible in placing you into such a palpable sense of the mental state of the character. Where you too seem just as lost. And remarkable is the moments he gives to Josephson to perform directly to camera that keeps all of this very personal and not too abstract at any point. That is providing the grounding even in the biggest leap, which is captivating in the scene with Maria where Tarkovsky makes a big swing, yet one that is so incredibly captivating in his way of slowly unraveling the unexpected. Then the final sequence is brilliantly realized in every choice of observation of the event, that he also lights to seemingly change everything from the state we had been in, though not suddenly that of comfort, but just of a different kind of isolation. Tarkovsky once again crafts a singular experience, that while there are common techniques, the ends are never common or repetitive.
Nykvist's work combined with Tarkovsky is obviously impressive, and you have the naturally incredible framing and composition, which of course often in the moving long shots yet that quality is never lost whether in movement or not. What you are further granted though is kind of a different angle by this combo on familiar land from Bergman, though presented with a different kind of scope that gives more sense of the land and the scale of it, particularly the way the house is shot around. Greatness of course is both interior and exterior, and I suppose that is the most Bergmanish in the composition of these shots, though with a tilted perspective of the point of view being almost 1st person by Tarkovsky's method which isn't Bergman, and is particularly captivating through that. Tarkovsky with Nykvist creating a very different version of "God's view" as even the interiors have this quality particularly as one peers down on Alexander's prayer. The lighting though is the genius here, with the contrasting of the clarity of the environment against the gloom near the end of the world.
Jonathan Williams:
Kane very much feels like their one off-beat choice they've been doing for the past few years like Rogowski last year. She's actually pretty good, and actually supporting, so I wouldn't hate for her to crash the race though I doubt it.
Otherwise, seemed to fit the bill of critical favorites of The Brutalist, Nickel Boys and Anora all getting wins,. Good start for Brody in terms of "legitimatizing" a second win. I think Jean-Baptiste probably will still struggle to make a five, but always good to get on the map.
I do find Culkin's win annoying (not commenting on the quality of his performance) because he's definitely lead, and critics also selling the studio narrative is more than a little tiresome.
Tahmeed:
1. Andrei Rublev
2. Stalker
3. Mirror
4. Nostalghia
Luke:
Well you don't need to sell me on being excited for an Eggers film, but all the praise certainly maintains my excitement.
RIP Marshall Brickman
Also ratings for recent viewings:
Sallywood:
Kirkland - 3.5
Steelman - 2.5
Connolly - 2.5
Tilly - 3
Roberts - 2.5
Carradine - 3.5
Alonzo - 2.5
von Dohlen - 3
Lerner - 3
Between The Temples:
Schwartman - 4
Kane - 4.5
De Leon - 3
Aaron - 3
Smigel - 3
Weinstein - 3
Shear - 1.5
Louis: your thoughts on the casts of both films?
I have officially made Ryan Gosling my 2023 Supporting Actor win. I have no real desire to watch Barbie again, but his work has really really stuck with me, and I took for granted what he did.
Louis: Unless Bryan can find them for me, can I have your thoughts on Maika Monroe and Alicia Witt in Longlegs, Willa Fitzgerald and Kyle Gallner in Strange Darling, Emily Watson in Small Things Like These, Florence Pugh in We Live In Time, Chloe East & Sophie Thatcher in Heretic and Moore, Qualley & Quaid in The Substance.
Louis: What are some films that for you, that did product placement 'right.'
Nice to hear that Lerner and Von Dohlen did fine in their final roles.
Marcus: "It's not Al anymore... it's DUNK."
Marcus: Just cause I just watched it yesterday and ADORED it, The Holdovers. "Champagne of beers."
Lucas:
Kirkland - (Personally I'd have liked to see a satirical version of her reflecting on her Oscar nomination campaign and we go back in time to see her methods to secure it. Otherwise, Kirkland is fun at poking at her own career and her playing around with the notion of her very specific level of fame. There are some iffy moments mixed in with better ones, I suppose speaks to maybe the inconsistent tone of the film that sorta wants to have a heart while also being more often ridiculous, so she struggles to merge the elements. Still when she is just having fun, her performance is indeed fun in tip-toeing around ego with self-deprecation with cynicism. She's not terrible with the more serious moments, but they don't entirely work either.)
Steelman - (Not really leading man material, and maybe that's the point, however I wouldn't say he's quite there as nebbish unexpected leading man material either. He certainly brings a definite energy to the part but he always feels much more of a caricature than a person.)
Connolly - (Fairly generic crude guy performance, not terrible but doesn't stand out either.)
Tilly - (Found her an enjoyable enough surprise here as the mom in bringing a mom energy which is definitely different which I found amusing enough.)
Roberts - (A time where it fits to be over the top, however found him largely not that funny.)
Carradine - (His line delivery on Veganism is probably the best joke in the film, in a large part because of his delivery of the joke. An underwritten character however Carradine brings so much history in every word he does get of presenting the man just kind of spent with the industry and accepting a specific lesser existing as someone not hating but not loving it either. Creating the most believable off-beat energy of anyone to the point I wish he had been given much more to do.)
Alonzo - (Like Roberts)
von Dohlen - (Nice play off of Tilly in just being so earnestly supportive the whole time in a purposefully overly straightforward way, but it works and is an amusing bit.)
Lerner - (Feel there was more fun to be had in invoking maybe a friendlier Lipnick, however still nice to see Lerner who brings the expected old big brass energy for a few scenes.)
Schwartzman - (Seems like he's having his own DiCaprio run as a guy dealing with being a widower once again, and perhaps this only reaffirms my feelings towards his performance in Asteroid City, as I actually believed the sense of malaise this time. Schwartzman embodies here the internalization of his grief with the sense of a period of time as the man just sinks within himself and he creates that waning pain as though things were already troublesome even before then. That quality being the common feature until he meets with Kane's character, where what he does well is just bring the sense of quiet joy to his interactions with her and the right chemistry based behind the sense of mutual warmth. Schwartzman brings this quiet dormant passion when discussing his specific expertise and following that idea as the man seems empowered by life. The other elements feel more contrived, and while I don't think Schwartzman is bad in these scenes, they aren't as effective.)
Kane - (Nice just to see her get a meaty role though I would say much of the role could've been just a ridiculous idea of a person rather than an actual person. Kane in a way is able to thrive with the eccentricity, because she is such an eccentric performer to begin with in some ways just because of her presence being so natural so it makes it far more convincing that we would believe that this woman would want to perform a bat mitzvah. Kane innately has that flamboyance that makes it much more believable strangely enough, while also just being fun in her way. Having said that though this is an appropriately tempered performance by Kane, she brings just the right degree of kookiness without overdoing it, which I think would've been pretty easy with the role that could've fallen into just eccentricities. She balances it though in every moment of reaction or commentary on what has led her to this curious choice late in life. Kane brings the right nuance in these moments to the lonely woman seeking something in her later life, and finding those bits of joy as she progresses towards the ceremony.)
De Leon - (A fairly lame role as the non-supportive mom, though she still has a presence which at least keeps her somewhat engaging even as it isn't a particularly interesting part.)
Aaron - (Not a great role either but portrays the moments of direct motherly love are decent enough.)
Smigel - (Slightly amusing in just portraying the Rabbi's fixation on donations as just unabashedly as possible.)
Weinstein - (The most ridiculous of all the roles in how constructed it feels, however Weinstein does find a way to at least try to sell all her moments to not be absurd.)
Shear - (Classic atrocious caricature amplified by performance where he just plays into the over the topness in a way where you don't believe it for a second and just feels like a hectoring opponent.)
Marcus:
Not sure how many of these are truly product placement, in that the filmmakers were getting paid, but some use of real products that are great.
Blue Velvet: PABST BLUE RIBBON!
Mississippi Grind: Two Woodfords
Wayne's World: Bowing to several corporate sponsors.
Back to the Future: The DeLorean and Pepsi
James Bond: Aston Martin
Cornetto Trilogy
Ghostbusters: Twinkies
Miracle on 34th Street: Macy's
A Christmas Story: Red Ryder BB Gun
Marcus: Maybe the conflicting use of Burger King in The Terminal and Beef (have to cosign Louis's statement on BK Original Chicken Sandwiches being a true to life depiction of rock-bottom).
Louis: Thoughts on the NBR winners.
This sort of slipped past my radar the past week....if it hasn't been discussed yet, what's everyones thoughts on the trailer for "Queer"?
Juror #2 is a pure legal potboiler that I enjoyed, even if some of the jury performers suggest Eastwood's to a fault efficiency where "go again but a little less" might not have hurt things. Having said that, the central hook is pretty great, and results in an entertaining exploration of that essential moral question. While it theoretically could've maybe gone further in a few respects, I actually appreciated that it didn't throw in any ridiculous wrinkles and kept to the main idea which kept me engaged throughout.
Hoult - 4
Collette - 4
Simmons - 3
Messina - 3.5
Basso - 3
Deutch - 3.5
Yarbrough - 3
Bibb - 2
Sutherland - 3.5
Moore - 3
Rest of jury: 1.5 - 2.5
Louis, on the topic of egregious category fraud, what would you say are the most egregious cases in Oscar history of a leading performance winning an Oscar in the supporting category?
Luke:
I definitely gave thoughts on Monroe and Witt previously.
Fitzgerald - (Her performance delivers on playing and in around the twist of her character. As the opening she brings the dogged determination of what you think will be a horror heroine, though then the moment of her smoking has this curious lack of traditional fear that is the first sign of more. Then with her "romantic" scenes she brings this playfulness that reveals itself as not her just being playful to have fun, but rather to have fun being a psychopath as it changes everything she does as a game. Revealing herself with this quiet confidence about herself when playing with her prey, though effectively differentiating the moments where she kills though that get in her way with this emptiness of nothing. And while the last act is the weakest, she still plays every moment well even as it becomes more standard, particularly her final scene that she manages to make much of in a most unusual final focused shot.)
Gallner - (The one cheat in the film is the "hey kitty kitty scene", not on Gallner but that obviously isn't really true to his character, even his character on cocaine feels false. Having said that Gallner's effective the rest of the time in playing the reactions just straightforward and honestly in getting intrigued then confused, then just fearful, then ferocious, and brings the right straight man reflection that also plays as potentially certainty of someone more dangerous however doesn't reveal itself as such.)
Jonathan:
In terms of predictions it is interesting that the Brutalist came up so short both here and the Independent Spirit Awards, supposedly there was screener issue but we shall see. Either way not exactly the most pivotal precursors regardless. Regardless nice getting on the map for Craig and Kidman. And Culkin getting two is a good start for him (though again tiresome fraud). Very interesting that Fanning landed here given the early word was for Barbaro, will be interesting to see if she goes anywhere.
Quality wise, I will say in most years I might be more critical of a Wicked win. But this year is so "eh" for me, I can say "eh fine" even if I'd definitely take Anora over it, and Chu winning director to go with it is definite overkill. Still given it would sit decently high in that top ten, whatever...which I do I hope I kind find a bit more passion in the remaining serious contenders.
Anonymous:
Timothy Hutton
Tatum O'Neal
Jack Albertson
Alicia Vikander
Brad Pitt
Peter Ustinov - Topkapi
Daniel Kaluuya
Louis, thoughts on this year’s selection for the National Board of Reveiew?
J96: It would seem he discussed them above, in response to Jonathan.
Louis: Rating and thoughts on Tews in Hundreds of Beavers?
Marcus: Also when it comes to product placement, I'll single out American Psycho (everything made by Huey Lewis and Phil Collins) and Sideways (Pinot Noir and an example of anti-product placement when it comes to Merlot).
Louis: Thoughts on Hoult and Collette.
Louis: Since you've seen Sallywood, tell us what are the best performances by actors who played themselves or fictional characters who have the same names as their actors? It could be a cameo, a supporting or even a lead.
Louis: Thoughts on AFIs’ Top Ten?
Luke:
Watson - (A briefer performance than I expected going into the film as she only has a few scenes. Watson though is most effective in avoiding the cliches that are potentially rampant in such a role, as it would be very easy to be over the top in say the Melissa Leo in Novitiate way. Watson instead portrays the role where the methods of the character are very much within the power of someone who is protected by institution. Everything Watson does is with the calm ease within her approach, where there is a chilling quality to her and a menace, however Watson presents it as part of this assurance of her power. Watson doesn't need to raise her voice or even push the threat, the threat is just in every calm phrase and in her eyes the precise message hidden behind the seemingly more gentle words.)
Pugh - (A good example of what an actor can do, because the material is pretty ridiculous as both tear jerking and romcom. As every cutesy moment is particularly contrived here, as are the melodramatic swings such as her character telling her story of her father's cancer only to suddenly be inflicted by the pain of her own unknown cancer at the same time. It is to her credit that, while I wouldn't say successfully hides these elements, she makes them work to an extent. Just because Pugh has a nice comedic energy that doesn't oversell the moments granting them at least some semblance of reality through her reactions even if they are forced as written. In the melodrama, Pugh's emotional work only ever feels honest no matter how contrived the moment might be, Pugh brings nuance and emotional conviction no matter what. She doesn't fall into the melodrama herself, making the swings at least believable within her own work, even if they might not be believable on the whole.)
East & Thatcher - (For much of their performances they are the contrasting sides of the coin, where Thatcher exudes a quiet confidence and seeming cynicism, against East's performance that feels more so the typical missionary type character you'd see in many films, with an overt optimism and a kind slightly unbelievable cheery quality. Each fulfills the type well as the setup and contrast that does work. Each then subverts this however within the scheme of the film, as despite Thatcher's initial cynicism there is a passion within her performance, against East where she portrays more overt fear over the situation. When the break happens, East successfully portrays the loss of optimism not as a facade but natural reaction to the situation. Effectively layering her work to allude to nature as her core even as she is challenged by what is in front of her. They are both good, even if limited slightly by the film that eventually as the film becomes flimsier the more it goes on.)
Shaggy:
Jean Claude Van Damme and Peter Falk are the best.
Bryan:
In terms of predictions there is plenty of race to run, but those ten are very believable to be the best picture lineup.
In terms of quality, again speaks to the quality of the year overall, even though there are indeed greater choices, that I don't mind Conclave, and A Real Pain making it, given I think they are just okay overall. Then Wicked and Sing Sing I like, but don't love. But at least Anora and Dune are most welcome for me. Though...Perez is most unwelcome. Here's hoping the remainders on this list will pump up the overall quality.
I’m using one of my requests for Jan Malmsjö in Fanny and Alexander for 1982 Supporting. Honest to God dethroned Hauer for me.
Robert: You've made me extremely happy.
Luke: I look forward to like 5 or 6 of Louis’s Supporting Actress top 10 for 1982 just be the various women from it
Looking forward to the cast ensemble review, from the extended cut, I also have Kulle, Josephson, Ahlstedt and Edwall.
Though I do think Malmsjo needs his own review post, There's a lot I want Louis to talk about.
After much thinking, I'll be recommending the directors cut of Legend (1985), I need Tim Curry rated and ranked for 85 Supporting.
Luke: Since we've got quite a few villainous turns reviewed for 86 supporting and your decision to get Tim Curry's Darkness ranked, I'm going to hold off on Mockingjay Part 2 for a year and recommend Frank Langella's performance as Skeletor in Masters Of The Universe instead for a viewing. It's a bad film but Langella's having the time of his life and he admitted that it was one of his favourite roles.
Robert: Although you haven't seen the mini-series yet, which categories do you think Louis could give the win to.
Picture
Director
Original Screenplay
Actress (Ewa Fröling)
Supporting Actor (Jan Malmsjö)
Supporting Actress (Gunn Wållgren)
Ensemble (Top 10, maybe Top 5 of all-time for me)
Production Design
Cinematography
Costume Design
I haven’t seen any version of Fanny and Alexander since high school, but I’m putting all my money on Zelda Rubinstein in Poltergeist for Louis’s 1982 Supporting Actress.
Louis: thoughts on the Joint Security Area scene of Soo-hyuk meeting Kyeong-pil and Woo-jin for the first time when he's stepped on a mine? Rewatched today and forgotten how intense but also incredibly funny it is (especially Lee's hilarious crying face when begging them not to leave him alone).
Louis: Looking at photos of them, who would you cast as Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun?
Luke:
Moore & Qualley - (Both are working towards a balance between extreme stylism while maintaining any kind of semblance of humanity. Which is quite the trick given the particular extremes of the film. And honestly both run away with it. Because they are successfully big Qualley in being the overly exuberant, overly sexy, overly youthful and wonderful in each element by just embracing that quality so much. And while it is all big, Qualley manages to show this specific quality of discovery that conveys initially the connection but then segues to this almost addict like quality as she overextends her usage. Moore is great in playing the intensity of the vulnerability of the character as we see her make her initial choices from a place of honest desperation. When it progresses Moore is terrific in the moments of portraying the growing sense of dissatisfaction particularly the mirror scene, which is a big scene, however as big as the gestures are, she owns the style of trying to create the perfection by growing it within this initial spark of something real of that vulnerability and turning it into something so much more extreme that she manages to own the style by having substance (no pun intended) within it. Of course as the turns continue each of their performances do successfully. Qualley's great actually by bringing a bit more vulnerability herself in the moments of distress and the scenes where seems to be falling apart from her. Still heightened, such as a particular smile, which is brilliant in its insanity, but as unrealistic as the smile is in a sense, it is also perfect in the representation of this extreme. The same is true for Moore, where obviously some extreme makeup related changes happen with her, and her going into becoming this ball of vicious desperation that turns into a strange self-loathing and hate, however the hate burgeons towards "the other" rather than self in the same way. Actually writing about both performances, I'll move them both to 5, as I love everything they do and each is an extreme highwire act.)
Quaid - (A bit of grotesquery that completely worked for me, in just very much playing into all sleazy notes as intensely as he can, from the constant flatterer who is so excessively proud regarding everything with his new star, to the coarse agent dismissing his old client immediately with as intense disregard, or just his horrible way of eating shrimp that is as grossly as possible.)
Hoult - (Technically in one of my least favorite settings for Hoult, as while he has the appearance of a leading man, he's best when not being a straight leading man. This is however probably his best work of that ilk, even if I still much prefer him getting to play around with various kinds of madness. Here Hoult's performance works in bringing this low key earnestness of seemingly the honest man who just loves his wife without complication at first, although I would say he is perhaps slightly stiff though that may be with intention. As the film progresses, essentially Hoult thrives by alluding to his greater talent as a performer when revealing very subtly at times a greater emotional vulnerability and complication within his performance. Every moment where he pushes from the "good guy" state, Hoult absolutely thrives in creating the sense of vulnerability within the character. Although Hoult is still best when he lets loose, this is fine work that holds it all together.)
Collette - (A little overly twangy early on, however gets pretty comfortable with the accent by the end and ends up not being a distraction. She delivers on the passionate prosecutor early on, overdoing it to the extent that is needed in playing the overly noble politician that outlines her qualities most directly and somewhat phony. Not entirely but balanced enough with it. All good, but where she excels is in the second half where we see the facade breakdown and portrays well the struggle with her consciousness. Collette builds this quite powerfully from being fairly quiet on the slight nagging thought in her performance that slowly expands. Bringing the emotional vulnerability authentically in creating the break in her morality, and showing this building conviction particularly in the climactic conversation where she is terrific in embodying so much throughout the scene.)
Matt:
Hew - 2(Very one note performance of just making the same or at least very similar goofy expression. He very much enforces a distance by playing towards such an over the top note consistently, and not having those visually silent moments that the best silent comedic performers made such great use of. He's always trying to be silly which is a problem, he doesn't take the moment to be genuinely funny because he's too busy being big.)
Calvin:
Park excelling with tone as completely building the actual tension of the situation when dealing with the mine, however hilariously comical in Lee (decidedly not playing a badass in this scene)'s fearful reactions but also both reactions when they initially face off by bungling their guns before being off-set by Song's Kyeong-pil entering with a casual disregard for the situation, before Soo-hyeok's pleas, and I love the other two's reaction very much as just passing by men "oh sure we'll help", reflected again as they leave just as casually. A great "meet-cute" honestly as we see the potential for friendship in the helping diminish the initial tension of the encounter.
8000's:
Henry Clay: Doug Jones
John Quincy Adams: I mean Hopkins still is a nice fit for old Adams.
Daniel Webster: Ciaran Hinds
John C. Calhoun: Jim Carrey
Louis: what are your thoughts on the rest of the cast of Juror #2?
The Order is Kurzel seemingly at his most invisible, which in terms of his direction isn't actually a criticism, where he doesn't get in the way of creating some intense action sequences, and crafting a general dread filled atmosphere. Having said that, like Snowtown Murder, and Nitram to an extent, it grants a disturbing perspective of men who exist and thrive off of hate. A calm collected hatred that is particularly unnerving by Kurzel's matter of fact method of the presentation. More digestible than either of those films theoretically though by granting equal perspective to the procedural elements of the police and FBI trying to track down the criminals. An aspect that's a mixed bag of some intriguing elements, mixed with retreads and cliches. It doesn't help that Jude Law frequently has to act against a block of wood, the weird thing is that block of wood weirdly resembles a once promising child actor.
Saving Hoult and I'll release Quinn for A Quiet Place.
Law - 4
Sheridan - 2
Smollett - 3
Oliver - 3.5
Maron - 3.5
Slezak - 3
Quinn - 4.5(A performance that is mostly about silent acting as he manages to contain a lot within his eyes just from the moment we see him, we see the fear of the situation and a man lost in the city in more ways than one. Quinn's performance manages to make the threat tangible and honest, while also suggesting the pained state of an isolated man who was already planning on dying even before having theoretically an easy way to get killed. His work is remarkable in the way he progresses within the film in showing just this growing sense of concern that builds towards this resilience in his chemistry with Nyong'o, that culminates in the pizza and a magic trick scene where Quinn is absolutely charming however also conveys just the man finding this purpose suddenly in his life again.)
Louis: Category placements for Law and Hoult.
Louis: What has gone wrong with Tye Sheridan?
Lucas:
Simmons - (Quick incisive bit from him, something that he typically does well and efficiently does so here.)
Messina - (Nicely doesn't over do it at all here, which I find he typically does to at least some degree, and rather nicely gives a low key humanity and concern within his character's lawyer speak. Although largely a functional role, Messina does more than a little between the lines to show at least some personal passion beneath it all.)
Basso - (Major upgrade from his Hillbilly Elegy work, however I think his performance wavers between effective and a little stilted within scenes. There are definitely good moments in his performance reflecting genuine vulnerability mixed in with a low key sense of danger. Imperfect though as other moments he's slightly awkward but not bad work.)
Deutch - (As just the "wife" character I thought she fought well to make an impact, one in just bringing genuine warmth with her interactions with Hoult, but also the quiet sense of the past desperation. She's particularly effective though in her later scenes where she presents the choices of her character with honest complexity where she doesn't simplify any act, even in her choices where she presents the hesitation subtly within the overall conviction to keep her life intact.)
Yarbrough & Moore - (Along with Simmons the best acting jurors other than Hoult of course, both bringing the right blunt fed up quality in their performances and their reactions consistently present the people who just are not buying what Hoult is selling in the right way.)
Bibb - (Representative of the rest of the jury where her performance just a bit too big in every reaction and every choice of being a caricature rather than a character even for just a few lines.)
Luke:
Both lead, though there's certainly worse category fraud than Hoult in supporting and I would be interested to know his exact screentime.
Bryan:
I feel like he likely became too confident and in a certain sense began to coast in his performances on his "presence". The problem being he probably needed that push or need to prove himself, while also suffering from someone who just has a non-existent presence if there's no emotional thrust in his work.
This is a particularly good example of that where there are so many moments where I couldn't help but think "that's all you're going to do to sell this moment?" throughout his performance here, to the point he does make the one unintentionally funny moment in the film due to his near non-reaction to what should be a horrifying moment. Let's just say the work reminded me of a certain performance in War Horse where it flipped the intentions of a moment so severely.
Louis: Your thoughts on the LAFCA winners.
Louis: Your thoughts on these scenes from Draftee Daffy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCo3gGDO2Uo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J3meQ2yPUI
Louis, your current Cinematography predictions?
Jonathan:
Consistent I think in terms of what I mostly expected to be the critical favorites in Anora, The Brutalist and Nickel Boys. Followed by Jean-Baptiste getting another win which is never a bad thing and Madison unsurprisingly showing up. Good get for Borisov, not that I think this nomination will get him the Oscar nomination but it is important for him to get singled out as the supporting rep for the film. I am continued to be annoyed by Culkin's fraud being accepted by all groups so shamelessly, can't anyone have some credibility come on! Anyway, also surprised by his sweep so far, really would've thought Maclin would have been the preferred critics choice....also he's actually supporting.
8000's:
I mean classic Daffy freakout and breakdown, though actually fairly subversive for the time it was made given overt propaganda was the style of the time, one of the cartoon characters not loving being drafted is actually fairly notable.
Amazing animation from the creativity of the prison, to every movement of Daffy to his shift to the devil, and especially the escape all really part of the same momentum.
Culkin is still riding high off Succession is the thing.
Dirk:
The Brutalist
Nickel Boys
Emilia Perez (Unfortunately)
Dune Part 2
Nosferatu (NGNG)
Louis: your thoughts on Kiefer Sutherland in Juror #2?
Edward Norton won the Boston Society of Film Critics for Best Supporting Actor for A Complete Unknown. Probably won't translate but that's interesting.
Lucas:
Sutherland - (Wholly there for just some exposition however Sutherland thrives with it, just bringing such an instant sense of severity to every word while also within it conveying the blunt sense of a curious kind of care he has for Hoult's character at the same time.)
Matt:
I think Norton being nominated will probably indicate whether or not Chalamet is in winning position. Which watch out, given it has been long enough since a musical biopic performance has won, for another one to win.
Louis: Thoughts on the Globe Nominations.
Luke, I was just about to ask that.
What do you predict for each category? I predict
MP DRAMA: The Brutalist
MP COMEDY: Anora or A Real Pain
DIRECTOR: Brady Corbet or Sean Baker (Villeneuve was SNUBBED)
ACTOR DRAMA: Adrien Brody
ACTOR C/M: Jesse Eisenberg
ACTRESS DRAMA: Angelina Jolie
ACTRESS C/M: Mickey Madison (MAYBE Zendaya or Demi)
SUPP ACTOR: Kieran Culkan or Denzel Washington
SUPP ACTRESS: DK, Ariana probably. MAYBE Margaret. Zoe and Selena will probably cancel each other out.
ANIMATED FEATURE: Wild Robot
SCORE: One of the movies with Zendaya in it.
SCREENPLAY: Pretty fair game knowing the globes and how a win here quite often doesn’t guarantee an Oscar lock. But my guess would be Añora or the Brutalist. A win for either of these would guarantee a Motion Picture win.
Luke:
Combo of old and new Globes overall in Maclin missing, however with Kapadia and The Substance love in general.
In terms of predictions, the big misses are Deadwyler, Maclin, Jean-Baptiste, and Ronan and Villeneuve in director. Expected Jean-Baptiste to miss here, Deadwyler could potentially speak to a lack of overall momentum, Maclin miss seems like a globe move and I do think he'll probably recover with SAG though this will make it far more difficult for him to unseat Culkin out of the driver's seat. Substantial misses for Ronan as this seemed a group for her to make it. And not overly surprised by Villeneuve missing giving the amount of director contenders.
Also seems like a Complete Unknown is in prime position as an old school pick, so we'll see just how far that goes. Notable neither supporting actress got in.
The rest of the lead contenders more or less all got in, Stan in a way does not help himself by getting in for both. As he still remains favored for either, which unfortunately he can't be. I could see him winning Comedy/Musical though, which maybe might shift some favor for him to unseat someone in the assumed five, but I wouldn't count on it unless he gets in SAG for the same film.
Quality Wise:
The bad: Emilia Perez love, particularly in screenplay, director and Gomez. Though the latter I fully expected but her over Chen and Deadwyler is a pretty abysmal choice.
But there are a lot of great choices overall, I particularly can support that Qualley and Moore recognition in terms of the semi-surprises. Though the former is lead.
Don't usually bother with TV but Oldman getting in for Slow Horses this year is a severe example of a name check. And hey still thought he delivered as Lamb, but he was barely in this season with Lowden DEFINITELY being lead. Otherwise would love to see Asano win something after losing the Emmy, and great to see Kline for his series saving work.
Louis, who do you think will win the Supporting Actress Oscar now? Or are you still predicting Deadwyler to win, despite the GG snub?
I also based my supporting win predictions on which nominees are really lead.
I agree the Danielle Deadwyler snub is a HUGE miss.
Anonymous:
Theoretically she still can win, particularly if there is a groundswell of support if she's perceived as having been snubbed twice for recognition. However I'll probably switch over to Grande, who I really hope dethrones Saldana as the frontrunner if it is down to those two. Though I do ponder how much gas The Brutalist has overall and ponder of Jones could be a dark horse.
and here i went thinking Better Man would come out next year
Post a Comment