Bill Murray did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character of the Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou.
The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou follows an underwater documentarian as he goes about an expedition to avenge his friend who was killed by a giant shark.
The career of Bill Murray is distinctly marked between box office star sarcastic Murray and the switch to Indie leading man/character actor sad Murray. The mark of the switch was seemingly brought on about Wes Anderson who first cast him in Rushmore where we got the first taste of sad Murray, followed by his Oscar nominated turn of sad Murray in the much lauded Lost in Translation, however I don’t mind going against the grain and saying his best work as sad Murray is in fact here in the then much derided Anderson follow-up to The Royal Tenenbaums. Although I’d say in general the perspective on Zissou has since evened out to a more than respectable entry into the Anderson oeuvre, with its critical reaction standing out as a random blip of the critics briefly rebelling against Anderson. A film I’ve always found so much to enjoy within it, a standout element being Murray himself, in the only time he’s led an Anderson film despite the frequency of their collaborations. Murray is delivering in a way two performances throughout the film, the first in a way respecting the notion of the silliness of Bill Murray as an underwater documentarian on some sort of revenge mission, the second being the real truth of the character that is essentially the depth of the work.
On the overtly comedic side of things we don’t really get sarcastic Murray exactly, but the specific comedic sensibilities of the old Murray are present here more so than a lot of his work post the millennium. As there is the comedic notions of the bungling Jacques Cousteau that Murray plays into with a natural ease, though a bit more dead in the dead pan than you’d find in prime blockbuster Murray of Ghostbusters, Groundhog’s Day and Scrooged. Nonetheless quite capable of being hilarious in the purposefully limited amount of energy he gives to the comedy. Such moments as when he notes to someone that his map is less inches for his path than her non-pirate infested water path so casually, and with proper lack of expertise in his delivery. Or his use of self-censoring “f” rather than the full expletive in as he places himself on a pedestal of unearned self-righteousness when confronting someone simply over their success with something he was interested in. Or even on the facilitation of a hilarious moment of Willem Dafoe’s Klaus’s sensitivity for not being on “A-squad” on a mission, and Murray’s paternalistic energy, closer to a kindergarten teacher than a boss, or even a high school boss, as he soothes over Klaus’s hurt feelings over not being chosen. I especially love the random bit of warmth Murray brings as he assures Klaus he’s “B-squad leader”.
Murray’s performance very much successfully accentuates the haplessness of Steve as any kind of leader, or certainly any kind of pioneering documentarian. Murray’s comedy very much works by just putting in the bare minimum effort whenever we see Steve speaking on the subject one should assume that he is expert on. That is of course expected when we see him specifically shooting footage for the documentary and Murray delivery puts on slight effort. Not great effort still but there is a phony pseudo attempted knowing intelligence Murray places on these explanations. It still isn’t as a man who truly knows beyond a basic level, but rather just a man who is presenting himself as he thinks he knows just for the moment of the documentary delivery. The humor of Murray’s performance comes from a man who seemingly has fallen backwards into the extremely specific life he’s chosen, but still treats that life as a man who has just fallen into it. And while this wholly works in a funny way, where Murray is very funny here, albeit in a lower key way than his initial work, it is more exact work than a lot of his later performances where Murray seems bent on only the most Jarmuschian style deadpan, here we get more of a blend, however even this actually plays into the part of the real performance that is realizing what is going with Steve throughout the film.
The other performance being something that is a constant technically in the comedy but is an underlying nagging quality of Murray’s entire performance. That being a man going through a deep depressive crisis started by the death of his friend Esteban who was killed by a shark before the film begins. There’s a notable contrast even in the opening scene between the deadpan Steve describing his documentary, and his intention of avenging his friend, to the Steve we see surfaces after the death of his friend. Murray very much gives us more than raw emotion as a man genuinely grieving and freaking out over the death of his friend, even if it is just a blip in the “documentary” we quickly cut away from. As we see Steve as a man who seems to “not to care” the rest of the time, what we see in the comedy is more so a reflection of the state of this man dealing with the death of his friend and by extension his own mortality. An element that Murray artfully intertwines as pivotal even if it is a man trying desperately to cover it up through pushing his energies elsewhere even towards indifference. A particularly early moment I love is when Steve sees footage of Esteban defending Steve, Murray portrays only the purest love mixed with heartbreak looking at his old friend, and we see the revenge is only to cover up that very real pain Steve hides most of the time. Something we see carry over to his blasé attitude, as even the scene where he introduces his mistress casually to the wife is of a man who has lost much interest in the common expectations.
This fuels him all the more in his relationship with his possible illegitimate son Ned (Owen Wilson) who comes to see Steve. Murray’s depiction of Steve’s relationship with Ned is one of the most low key depictions of an extreme desperation you’ll see, however a wholly convincing one suitable to a man in a near depressive daze. Murray on the surface brings the most eagerness you get out of Steve throughout the film and his reactions to Ned early on are with this glint of temptation essentially to to create some kind of wind. Murray plays it with a degree of self-delusion mixed in with his general cynicism, making himself a bit of a mess. There are moments where he plays it overly so as the “dad” who is taking his kid out camping or something, and wants his son to have the best time. Murray putting on a false energy at times, not in his own performance but rather Steve’s performance. Steve is living out this attempted fantasy where suddenly Ned is the most important thing in his life, even giving him the name “Kingsley” as what Steve would’ve given him if he had been there. What’s so remarkable though is how Murray undercuts all of this with the nagging heartbreak that is fully this enthusiasm. One particular moment when he reads an old letter he sent to Ned that in no way showed any real concern or connection. Murray allowing out just a moment of the real desperation as he modestly notes that the response was pretty boilerplate, is marvelous in revealing the truth of the relationship.
The relationship leads Steve on the questionable expedition, leading even to being attacked by pirates where we even get the rare Bill Murray action hero scene as he battles the pirates. Even that moment where Steve builds up towards his action is funny as he’s so nonchalant about it but even this reveals a man a little fed up with most of life with the pirates being a bit of a tipping point for him. After his heroics, caused more than in part by his own failings, with the pirates still leads to tragedy once again as Ned unexpectedly dies after the engine failure of Steve’s helicopter. Leading to Steve and his crew trying to find the legendary Jaguar shark with the sub with about all the cast onboard. This scene for me is my favorite Anderson scene in any of his films, which in part it is the realization of the setup with the beauty of Jaguar shark realized in only the way Anderson could, with an ideal song choice emphasizing that but most pivotally Murray’s performance as the man who is facing his theoretical tormentor with awe rather than anger. Murray’s amazing in the scene because you see him appreciating the wonder of the discovery with everyone else, but there’s so much more in his eyes than that. His delivery of “I wonder if it remembers me” is filled with so much pathos and the need of someone trying to find meaning in this moment, before Murray so powerfully fully breaks down in the scene to reveal all the emotion that has been within Steve this whole time. I love it because Murray is heartbreaking in revealing the tragedy within Steve, yet there’s this glint of hope trying to hold onto the meaning of the discovery and even more so trying to give himself any purpose after so much loss. Murray delivers a covertly powerful performance where he finds the very real tragedy in Bill Murray as an incompetent Jacques Cousteau.


90 comments:
Louis: Any upgrades.
Could you re-watch Hotel Rwanda and The Woodsman before you finish Lead.
Louis: Your Top 10 best performances in Wes Anderson films.
Luke: I gave Marsan a 3.5. The key part of that performance I can remember is his final scene, where he's effective in going from being paralyzed with fear to feeling a sense of happiness for the last time when in company of a titular character, though that scene is still all about Spall and how he amazingly conveys the emotions during that very dramatic moment.
What are your thoughts on the cinematography and production design?
Luke:
I'm going to try to do a glut of re-watches soon.
Shaggy:
1. Gene Hackman - The Royal Tenenbaums
2. Bill Murray - The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou
3. Ralph Fiennes - The Grand Budapest Hotel
4. Gwyneth Paltrow - The Royal Tenenbaums
5. Luke Wilson - The Royal Tenenbaums
6. Willem Dafoe - The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou
7. Jeffrey Wright - The French Dispatch
8. Cate Blanchett - The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou
9. Ben Stiller - The Royal Tenenbaums
10. Edward Norton - Moonrise Kingdom
Tybalt:
Both elements you see the progression of the Anderson style that he is refined, maybe to a fault, in his current films. But it is fascinating to see kind of the evolutionary step this is within the scheme of his films. In terms of cinematography, the lighting, framing and composition by Yeoman is far less exact, there's some eye-catching shots, but there's also a far less contrived quality where those shots even feel more pivotal and emotional a way because of it. It's less "perfect" here but in a way maybe that too is important to the humanity that I feel Anderson has lost.
The PD is similar in that you see the steps, some grand ones as the creature designs are all fantastic, and the aspects of the ship and submarine have those specific Anderson verse quality that is a refinement of the style. But different again in that those elements are within in general a realistic setting where the fantastical successfully does exist with that. And it works as more so a highlight, even if less overt.
Louis: If you can, could you watch the films that I mentioned on the list that are not Supporting related (Troy, Kill Bill Vol. 2 and perhaps Dodgeball). I'm sure you'll re-watch Collateral before then to make a final decision on your lead winner.
My favourite performance ever from him. Watching this first time I did not expect him to make me cry, but that's what happened.
Anonymous:
Marbeck - (He’s visually just about perfect, and he certainly convinced me that I would find every movie he would ever make absolute torture. But it’s such a surface depiction as written we just get the vibe of him and no more. Marbeck delivers on the “vibe” of the man who believes him absolutely to be a genius while being an obvious jerk but not more than that. But again that is all that is really here as written.)
Deutch - (Found she got the most out of it in playing the ever changing reaction to the film. Finding moments of being genuinely intrigued, then disgusted, then annoyed and just naturally going through the steps with a natural life to her work. Again we don’t really get to the meat of who Seberg was beyond an actress in a less than ideal situation, but she’s captivating to the extent she can be.)
Dullin - (Certainly looks like Belmondo, acts like Belmondo, convinced me he was Belmondo, but who was Belmondo? A slightly happy go lucky star I guess, but we don’t get much more from him.)
Luke:
I’ll wait for Skarsgård's review for Reinsve.
Lilleaas - (I think it will be a shame if she gets left off but I could see it happening because it is such a low key performance within the scheme of the film. Although she’s absolutely essential to the power of the film as the balancing point between her two more emotional and strong willed family members. Lillieaas naturally finds the sense of history in every interaction between both in presenting the sense of her accentuating the positive with her dad to the best of her ability and also offering a quiet comfort with her sister and a non-judgmental reaction to her more jumbled life. Lilleaas even as she is often reserved brings so much wisdom and quiet emotion in her reactions of someone who is always doing more reflecting and less acting on those thoughts. Something that is perhaps epitomized by one scene of her just reading something, but that scene is transfixing thanks to Lilleaas portrayal of taking it all in, just as we do. So when she does kind of become more direct Lilleaas earns it so beautifully in both of her key scenes, and while she still does plenty of reaction, her taking point has this impact as you’ve seen all in her so her bringing it out is so naturally cathartic.)
Fanning - (She’s wholly good here though the design of the piece is very much not to focus on her in a way. Fanning though I think nicely doesn’t overplay the potentially more superficial elements of her character. She realizes them but never as parody. Particularly as we see her trying to figure out the part, Fanning is very good at being a worse actress than she actually is, but not a horrible actress. Rather accentuating the way she’s just never *quite* there yet is earnestness in her attempts to be so.)
I'll never forget watching Pierrot Le Fou in a packed theater. My entire film class and I wish we could though.
Louis: You know, rewatching Guns at Batasi and that scene where Lauderdale refuses to give Boniface the weapons, Boniface, despite outranking Lauderdale and keeping a cool about it (despite raising his voice in one part of that scene), you can tell that he feels somewhat intimidated by Lauderdale.
Lauderdale's that type of NCO who could scare even colonels and generals.
Louis: Thoughts on the film's script and direction?
Louis: What are your thoughts on Bruno Dreyfürst in Nouvelle Vague?
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast of Twinless.
8000’s:
Well again one of the reasons Attenborough is my win, as the whole scene to be believed is entirely on performance and Attenborough makes you absolutely believe that Lauderdale would will himself to victory.
Harris:
The screenplay and the direction in a way are particularly in tandem here, because this screenplay is not one of pinpoint accuracy in terms of the plot progression especially, because basically structurally it is Steve bungling around for awhile until he sees the shark again, and bouncing off the various random figures in his life. Although there is a structure in the sense of some sort of reflective growth Steve finds by the end, the acknowledgement of his wife, Ned’s fate, even Klaus and Ned’s relationship, the growth is realized this isn’t a case of swiss watch style screenplay. But it works, in part because what is there is the seeds of what Murray runs with in what the revenge really is, and the bits throughout are often absolutely hilarious, or incisive in some way. A notable balance between comedy and finding emotion in there, and in a way again the imperfectness of it maybe is actually important to Anderson to keep his humanity. Bringing to the direction which again we see more of a balance in Anderson where we have his diorama aspects, however as highlights within a reality, so we have humans that are idiosyncratic, not crafted mannequins. Anderson technically directing this with an idea of it as Steve’s doc, though I think rightly cheats (and honestly often being dogmatic with such choices I think can be a mistake, to have that an element of his choices, but also letting scenes just work in more traditional cinematic sense brilliantly, such as the amazing Jaguar shark scene, which is purely a crafted cinematic moment, and absolute mastery by Anderson. Because we get great visuals of the shark, great song choice, but as important is focusing on the human moment of Steve’s reflection and the reaction of everyone else to that. Boy do I miss this Anderson.
Lucas:
Dreyfürst - (Again brings an enjoyable put upon producing energy where he plays a quiet intrigue that soon devolves to frustration. Hitting a light comic beat that works, though again I think more could’ve been done with this idea.)
Luke:
Sweeney - 4(As the director starring in their own film he is better than some and I think manages to deliver a still overshadowed, however overall convincing portrayal of his character’s very specific situation. Creating initially this sort of weirdly isolating quality where you ponder the connection because of the reserved quality but then makes the reveal make sense. And after that reveal brings some real raw emotion to his moments of essentially falling apart in his own screwed up approach to try to recreate his own imagination of someone.)
Franciosi - 3.5(Again not a great role, but I didn’t know it was her until after I looked up the film, which goes to just show her impressive talent, from her 100% convincing American accent, but even more so convincing as such bubbly character compared to her usual deeply troubled people she usually plays.)
Louis: Thoughts on Lauren Graham in Twinless, plus ADL, Christensen, and Loven in Sentimental Value?
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast of After The Hunt.
your thoughts on this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Wda4u7i9ak
Louis: Now that it's on VOD, will you have the opportunity to rewatch OBAA this weekend? I remember you said you'll give thoughts on the cast after a rewatch.
Don't know what the critics from 2004 were thinking, but Man on Fire fucking ruuuuules.
Washington-4.5
Fanning-4
Walken-4(Maybe too high, but I kinda loved what he did with this)
Anthony-3
Mitchell-3
Giannini-3
Rourke-3(Strangely muted, but still fine)
Help me out, does anyone know if Eros, the anthology with films by Soderberg, Wong Kar-Wai and Antonioni is 2004 or 5?
Matt: was released theatrically in Italy in December 2004 so under this blog's rules, it's 2004.
Anonymous: Thank you.
Louis: Your thoughts on Stranger Things 5 Volume 1 when you see it?
Louis: Your thoughts on Nick Mohammed, Christopher Villiers, Cherrelle Skeete, Hiba Bennani, Monty Ben & Ahmed Elmusrati in Slow Horses S5.
Louis: What are the best scenes from these performances?
Jack Nicholson - The Shining
Jack Nicholson - The Departed
Tony Dalton - Better Call Saul
Laurence Fishburne - What's Love Got to Do with It
Harris:
Graham - 3.5(Delivers on the callous overbearing mom effectively, though she doesn’t really get to do much beyond that note, she hits that note well.)
Danielsen Lie - (He doesn’t get to do much, but he’s fine in his brief scenes as essentially the “boyfriend”.)
Christensen - (Doesn’t get too much to do but you instantly are granted a sense of his and Skarsgard’s relationship in just a few minutes. You get their back and forth over the years just through the specific exasperation and accommodating way of speaking around him.)
Loven - (Brings just the right completely natural little kid energy without cares and doesn't put more on it than that in a way that works.)
Luke:
Roberts - 3.5(She’s really trying to give some through line in the film, but sadly there’s too many missing pieces in the script for her to go to the next level. She’s trying to create balance between the different sides of the character, cultivate complexity when she can and importantly create meaning within the reactions to the ever changing situation. She’s always convincing here even if I don’t think where he takes her character to be all that interesting.)
Stuhlbarg - 2(He plays it almost like he’s auditioning for a Bond villain, and I’m not ever talking about a modern Bond villain. Hitting a broad note in every instance and playing it as a parody of an intellectual. The problem is there’s just nothing comedic about what he’s doing so he just comes across as this over the top stereotype and nothing more. Maybe being smug is just a bad note for him, as this reminded me of his work Arrival in a bad way.)
Edebiri - 2(She honestly just seemed lost in this performance. The emotion always seems wrong for a given scene, or the emotion just seems thin. A role like this needs to thrive on ambiguity, something she utterly fails with here. She instead just seems vague most of the time and is never convincing as someone who's been through what her character’s supposedly been through, or is someone doing some kind of manipulation of the situation. She just seems to be trying to figure out the scene as we are watching her, which is not a good note to be playing.)
Garfield - 4(Conversely now this is how you play with ambiguity. Garfield is able to remarkably paint the possible guilt of the character though in a way where you constantly see the defensiveness that while he may or not be guilty of that specific crime, he is likely guilty of some kind of similar crime. Garfield’s way of creating the aggression within the defense is able to realize this specific sort of disturbing sense of assurance within his position. Garfield is consistently captivating when he is onscreen in creating the unnerving qualities of his character, while never just becoming an over the top villain which I think was very easy to fall into. Garfield glides through the weak material and manages to stay above it throughout.)
Tim:
Well can’t agree that Eddie was a deeper character in The Color of Money in the slightest, but otherwise it is an articulate summary of a lot of what made Newman an interesting actor in his later years. Though I think it incorrectly undercuts his earlier work as Hud is obviously extremely different from Fast Eddie, even if you begin with Newman’s presence as a starting point.
Tybalt:
I’ll be unlikely to see it again just because of many other things I’ll be watching first.
Regarding If I Had Legs I'd Kick You:
Byrne is outstanding, and the general pressure cooker of the film is most compelling for the majority in its specific intensity mixed with surrealism. I particularly liked the touch of the never quite seen daughter’s pestering voice. Creating a captivating portrait of this extreme emotional strain with though I needed dark humor within its overwhelming strain it purposefully puts on Byrne’s character and by extension the viewer. I will say I did feel the ending was more so a “stop” than an ending, but even without something more captivating for its end, I still found it captivating up till that point, which I wouldn’t describe as a let down, just isn’t an elevation.
Byrne - 5
Slater - 4
Macdonald - 3.5
Rocky - 3.5
Zolghadri - 3
Louis: Are you saving Conan O'Brien?
RIP Tom Stoppard
I personally found quite a bit of dark humor in If I Had Legs I’d Kick You, but I’m glad you found it so effective overall and recognize Byrne for the powerhouse she is.
RIP Tom Stoppard
Michael:
A typo I meant to write "a needed dark humor".
RIP Tom Stoppard
RIP Tom Stoppard
RIP Tom Stoppard
Louis: Thoughts on the cast?
For Alternate Supporting, I now predict,
Russell Crowe
Jack O'Connell
William H. Macy
Jacopi Jupe
Conan O'Brien
R.I.P. Tom Stoppard
Luke: I think he might review Fiennes in 28YL given that he said he'd like to rewatch the film before giving thoughts on the cast. And I wouldn't count out Leguizamo, he has much more material in his film than either Macy or Conan.
Louis: In regard to Chris Stuckmann's notoriety on YouTube, thoughts on his direction of Shelby Oaks.
Louis: Are Rebuilding and A Little Prayer on your radar at all, and do you have any interest in either?
Louis: And your thoughts/rating for Keith David in Shelby Oaks?
Louis: Man, considering I still have some requests left, I wanted to request Clarence Williams III for Tales From The Hood(1995). A BALLS TO THE WALL performance. Hopefully someone backs me up on this, if they have seen the movie.
Anonymous:
Mohammed - (So far seems like he really doesn’t have much to offer beyond Nate, as yes the mayor here was intended to be kind of a goofy try hard in terms of his over friendliness but Mohammed brings absolutely nothing below this on the surface. Yes he could make it earnest but in the earnestness show someone who is putting it on just a little more for the sake of his political position, or any nuance within the ideas. Instead it’s an incredibly surface depiction of the character who is far more just a caricature of the sort of “win with hugs” politician.)
Villiers - (Speaking of the opposite, and obviously that was what the series was going for and in the way making certain digs at both though more at Villiers as the demagogue. Villiers is too playing what is essentially more so a caricature than a character in many ways, however I found Villiers more convincing as such. As there are moments of sort of putting more into the act and hints of doubt within his performance where you see him pushing himself to be more ridiculous than he already is. I wouldn’t say it still is the most nuanced take, but it’s not meant to be and I found him more convincing as any kind of a person, even a terrible one, than Mohammed’s performance.)
Skeete - (Found her to be serviceably fine in the role. Did okay “straightman” reactions to the horses, but didn’t think she came to life beyond that.)
Bennani - (Found her pretty over the “scared little bird” angle from her early scenes then the switch to the determined villain I found she went to two extremes, both that I found her performance of a little silly.)
Ben - (One note, over the top every moment of that one note, and just a ridiculous caricature where he managed to emphasize every broad stroke he could rather than find a hint of nuance.)
Elmusrati - (Probably found him the most believable of the terrorist cell, however even then I found him believable enough on a rather surface level that still really didn’t get too deep. Still compared to his co-stars in that segment he was considerably better.)
Anonymous:
Jack Nicholson - The Shining (Probably the typewriter scene)
Jack Nicholson - The Departed (Maybe his final scene)
Tony Dalton - Better Call Saul (His return to Jimmy/Kim after finding the car)
Laurence Fishburne - What's Love Got to Do with It (Probably his first scene)
Harris:
Byrne - (Amazing work because she manages to start at such a stressful note but never feels one note nor does it feel like she has nowhere to go. Rather Byrne is able to basically start as hanging on by a thread and slowly tear that thread away one razor thin strand at a time. Essential within this is her command of the tone of the performance. Where there is the core of it of very real emotion where the nearly debilitating stress just seems to be piercing through her at every step of her anxiety ridden existence. There is concern for herself, for her daughter, and just the weight of the situation, however the intensity of it goes far deeper than that. Her performance is searing in being able to play basically where that stress sends her, where you get the great notes of her lashing out at the nonsense she faces, sometimes with complete anger but others a more comedic disbelief at it. But she also has these almost moments of detachment where she’s just taken out by the sheer inability to comprehend and digest the insanity of it all. Within these extremes Byrne is always absolutely convincing but even more so brings you along in such a compelling way of making you absolutely understand every bit of what she’s going through. Even when she takes her more extreme actions later on, Byrne makes it sensible, maybe not sensible in reality, but convinces you wholly of where the character would go at this wits end.)
Slater - 4(His mostly vocal performance is extremely effective in being grating but also believable. Great casting I think as his particular voice just pierces through in a certain way and sounds innately callous, however Slater goes further and there is nuance within his work. As you do get a sense of this guy also reacting to the situation and is never alien.)
Macdonald - (Technically Byrne’s character if we had less insight into the situation though also convincing on her own note of extreme desperation without going overboard.)
Rocky - 3.5(Found him far more convincing here than in Highest 2 Lowest, as I think he brings a nice easy going semi comforting in a weird way quality in his work that provides a strange slight bit of relief within the oppressive world. He has an easy going comedic energy that works particularly well in his reactions to Byrne.)
Zolghadri - 3(Plays the note of quietly creepy with a particularly unpleasant privilege quite effectively.)
Luke:
Stuckmann’s direction seems like he maybe had one pretty good idea in a scene where there is a figure obscured in found footage, that was a decent idea and had creepy potential…however it makes up for about 10 seconds of screentime. Unfortunately the rest of the time you have many flaws. The found footage angle is a mix between trying to create some horror though not fully getting there and sort of bad home made footage, particularly the “reactors” to the “doc” which don’t add up to much. When it becomes just a more straightforward film in its presentation it gets worse however from his direction of the actors where his main actor starts at too high pitched of a note leaving her nowhere to go, and histrionic for the entire film. Or they are barely within the scene, or at best they’re just fine. Worse though you have moments of the attempted scares that just look silly, whether it is a ridiculous CGI dog, a character just casually sitting with someone else’s blood on their face depicted in a way that doesn’t make it look like shock, but rather someone in a comedy. It is more clunky than anything else.
Harris:
A Little Prayer would be 2023 by my rules so it’s not a priority, I probably will watch Rebuilding at some point.
David - 2.5(Pretty much the stereotype of the “we paid the name actor for a day” in a low budget horror film. David is trying well enough in the overly cliched role of the “I’ve seen too much” warden, but he can’t make it any less of a cliche.)
Stranger Things 5 I think you can probably criticize a plenty, as I do think it struggled to balance all the characters at this point and some of the character moments felt like wheel spinning at times. But having said that, was entertained by it and found it consistently very watchable regardless.
Started Pluribus and find it incredibly compelling so far, and creative in such a unique spin on essentially Invasion of the Body Snatchers, with Seehorn delivering an amazing performance.
Louis: Thoughts on 'Sorcerer' from Stranger Things and your MVP so far from these episodes?
Louis: Has Cheadle gone up.
Anonymous:
Hopper/11 stuff was fine, but again their relationship just feels a little repetitious at times. The teen crew waiting to get picked up was an example of not knowing what to do with the big cast here. But the whole Great Escape heist and climax was a great deal of fun with entertaining thrills leading up to the big moment which wholly worked for me, particularly as a cathartic antidote for how the character was treated the rest of the series.
Honestly probably Bower.
Luke:
No.
Louis: Between this and Licorice Pizza, which film do you think has the better use of Life on Mars?
Louis: Your choice for Alex Jennings's role in the 1970s Ballad of a Small Player from earlier? (Talk about another missed opportunity in that film on top of Swinton and Chen.)
Louis: Regarding that scene with Peter and Aunt May in Spider-Man 2 where she's moving to another place, do you think she also knew about him being Spidey?
8000S: I actually think htat was very much the intention, but then the "Spider-Man doesn't kill peope" scene in 3 fucked it all up
Luke, your top 5 predictions for 2004 Lead and Supporting.
1. Considine
2. Cruise
3. Ganz
4. Yagira
5. Murray
1. Pacino
2. O'Toole
3. Hoffman
4. Dafoe
5. Thornton
I am shocked Cheadle didn't get the 5, considering how much you liked the movie too. 2004 is me literally toggling between Carrey and Cheadle.
Louis: Thoughts on the Mother Mary trailer.
Louis: Thoughts on the NYFCC winners.
Tony:
I like both but Zissou's use I love.
Bryan:
James Mason
8000's:
That was the implication albeit screwed over by the sloppiness of 3.
Jonathan:
Looks like Vox Lux, mixed with The Substance and Phantom Thread. So naturally looks quite insane, and will probably either be amazing or a complete mess. Lowery's track record is pretty good, so hoping it is the former.
Luke:
Prediction Wise:
Hmm all four acting winners could actually get Oscar nominees. Del Toro needed to just establish himself as viable and this helps. Madigan just needed to show up places, given she seems likely maybe the only vet vying for a spot in her category at this venture. Byrne as a likely lone nominee seems the most likely to miss but her category seems thin enough that hopefully not. Moura could also miss as the acting branch can get safe, and I could see Secret Agent maybe only being an International nominee. But this certainly doesn't hurt him.
Otherwise a start for OBAA, Marty Supreme and It Was Just an Accident.
Quality Wise:
All for ABAA taking wins. Byrne is great to see. Although I feel left out because I merely like Madigan in the film, I won't complain too much if she gains more momentum. I'll admit I wasn't overly impressed by Panahi's direction of his film, but given the circumstances around the making of the film, I won't bring too much ire anytime he shows up this season.
Robert: Is O'Connor Lead or Supporting in Wake Up Dead Man and who was your MVP.
Luke: Not only is O'Connor lead, I'd argue Blanc is unambiguously supporting this time. O'Connor is definitely the MVP, but I loved what Brolin and Close were doing. Everyone is good though, even Spaeny is doing something interesting.
Robert: Pleased to hear that. Lead Actor could be having an all-time great year. Might even be a new record holder for most fives.
Luke: I genuinely don't even know how to come up with a top 5, and I haven't even seen Chalamet, Lee, or Moura yet. The only reason I'm keeping Elordi in my Supporting ballot is that he's borderline and I need to make room.
Robert: I'd go as far to say it'll be a '73 level nightmare for both you and Louis.
Louis: When do you think you'll have a chance to watch Hamnet?
Louis: What do you think are the biggest missed opportunities of the careers of Aaron Eckhart, Jim Carrey and Simon Pegg?
Louis: Kore-eda is set to direct a live action adaptation of Look Back, your thoughts on this.
Tahmeed:
I'll be able to see it this week.
Ytrewq:
Eckart - Evidently being difficult to work with, as obviously he was on the rise from 06 to 10, which stopped a bit too abruptly to just bad script choices.
Carrey - Fully retreating seemingly from attempted prestige work, seems like his arguable three snubs for Truman/Moon/Eternal Sunshine made him largely give up on more varied projects.
Pegg - Honestly for the sake of both he and Wright probably should've remained a team. Otherwise, and maybe just lack of opportunity, didn't find the right scripts (though some he didn't write all that well himself) in his brief time as a leading man, nor did he seemingly find some film opportunities to show off a greater range. However he evidently struggled with his fame to a degree which probably played a factor as well.
Marcus:
I mean the story was ripe for expansion and he is a master with young actors so that's certainly intriguing.
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on Camille Sullivan in Shelby Oaks and the cast of It Was Just An Accident.
Moura/Byrne/del Toro/Madigan is one hell of a quartet to begin awards season on.
Speaking of Carrey, Louis, I wonder had he continued to invest himself in more varied projects (and also perhaps improved his behaviour on sets), if there's any notable auteurs you could've seen him working well with? I was just randomly thinking how he could've probably been a pretty interesting PTA collaborator (a very different version of Freddie Quell in The Master maybe, or Bob Ferguson in OBAA)
Louis: Your thoughts on this "criticism" Tarantino had of TWBB?
https://ew.com/quentin-tarantino-trashes-weak-sauce-there-will-be-blood-star-11860944
Marcus: Yet another exhibit of him being an asshole, in the sense you're entitled to your opinion, but he phrases it in such a vile way that's sadly been the norm for him for quite some time.
Marcus: By this point he should be in a dictionary next to the phrase "high on your own farts".
Marcus: I mean, feel free to just ignore him, but saying Dano is "The weakest actor in SAG" is aggressively and pointedly mean. That is not an opinion, that is an insult with personal history behind it.
Matt: Yeah, I think back on the flak he rightfully got for saying that bullshit about Bruce Lee, and he just seems way too comfortable with unprovoked, random cruelty.
Tarantino spending the last few years parading around on a press tour no one asked for, with at best inane useless comments and at worst downright nasty and toxic rubbish, really makes you wonder what he's trying to do. For someone as weirdly preoccupied with his supposed 'legacy' as a filmmaker, surely he'd be a little bit conscious of how he comes off?
Louis: Your thoughts on the production and costume design of Queen Christina.
Speaking of that movie, talk about a fitting ending with a close-up on Garbo's beautiful face.
On Tarantino, what a C***.
i read that on Instagram thos morning and thought it was fake. Like, it doesn't even sound like something he'd usually say. That word choice is so needlessly cruel and unnecessary. Even when he didn't like someone before, he never said it like this
If its true Its pretty stupid from Tarantino to directly call Paul Dano out for no reason what so ever, he is a great filmmaker but an asshole as a human being. I don't know why he randomly also called out Owen Wilson and Matthew Lillard, like why??
oddest thing is: he calls Paul "the weak sister". Like, Quentin, you're not exactly a paragon of masculinity either ...
Calvin: "For someone as weirdly preoccupied with his supposed 'legacy' as a filmmaker, surely he'd be a little bit conscious of how he comes off?"...... You absolutely hit the mark with that.
Probably not fair of me, but it's hard for me to get into Tarantino just because of how immature he is.
Louis: Thoughts on NBR.
There's a very obvious elephant in the room that I don't think needs to be mentioned in the blog for the sake of keeping it actor/movie focused, but yeah, wouldn't be surprised if that is part of the reason for Tarantino's needlessly petulant cruelty.
Considering Tarantino *obviously* wanted to sell himself as a bit of an actor early on in his career in spite of how terrible he was, he should be embarrassed to even speak ill of others.
Emi: I hadn't even considered that until now, but yeah that would also make some sense of how his smug entitlement has actually somehow got even worse.
On another note, I love the OBAA wins in NBR.
Calvin:
I could see versions of that, or honestly Doc Sportello would seem ideal.
Could also seem be a great fit for Lanthimos (Dafoe's roles or even Duncan) or Del Toro (Strickland, Grindle/Clem/Pete or Waltz's part in Frakenstein) and of course above Wes Anderson (Mr. Fox, Scout Master Ward, Monsieur H. or Dmitri, or Korda)
Marcus:
Typical immature nonsense from Tarantino, same as when we discussed his Lee comments.
8000's:
I mean the costumes is like Leigh with Gone With the Wind, where every costume on Garbo is a knock out and usually a knock out in a completely way, whether that be dress or trousers. They look stunning and she looks stunning. The background costumes are great too but it is the Garbo fashion show.
The production design is extremely remarkable as well where you see so many period set had a very generalized design, here there is a clear eye and stylization of the sets. Where they're not one hundred percent realistic but they have far more character from it.
Luke:
Prediction wise One Battle could just keep going. NBR winners can miss on nominations but nonetheless important for Lilleaas to get on the board if it becomes between her and Fanning for the nomination. Only two wins but that is some serious momentum building for Del Toro, who you never know could pull a Hugh Griffith/Peter Ustinov. Though I think Penn is still getting in unlike their villainous co-stars. Byrne needs as many mentions as she can get so this good for her.
Speaking also quickly on the Indie Spirits as well (which mostly were non-contenders which I think speaks more to most of the contenders being bigger budgets this year), Train Dreams showing up here and there is certainly something. Don't know if it will be enough but any mentions are good for it.
Interesting miss for Hamnet, don't think it means too much but it is something.
Quality Wise:
Wicked and F1 do not need to make any top tens. But hey I'll take most of the rest, love seeing Train Dreams show up, along with Byrne and Lilleaas.
Post a Comment