Bob Hoskins did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Louis "Lou" Lansky in Mermaids.
Mermaids is an okay coming of age story about a teenage girl in the 60’s Charlotte (Winona Ryder) dealing with her single mother Rachel (Cher) who never seems to be able to stay in one place.
The film opens as the family, including also the youngest sister Kate (Christina Ricci), move to a small town in Massachusetts where they meet shop owner Lou played by Bob Hoskins. I have covered Hoskins several times in the past in his various leading roles as an atypical but impressive leading man. This is the first time I am reviewing him for a supporting role where Hoskins is not intended to be the center of attention. Hoskins seemingly respects that idea and gives a performance that is particularly generous in his grace through every scene. As I think given the nature of the film and the part there could have been a tendency to turn his Lou into too much of character to stand out overtly in the narrative and become a caricature. Hoskins instead seems intent on being quietly convincing and adding to a much-needed honesty to his film. When we first meet Hoskins, he brings a nice eager but believable energy as the shop keep who does not mind having a little fun with his costumers. Hoskins has a nice easy charm about it and sets up a nice sense of his instant attraction to Rachel. Hoskins does not make overt just a little glint in his eyes as a quick fascination with the woman who is very quick to speak her mind. I particularly love just his genuine quick laughter from the asides and his way of delivering the responses as just something that energizes Lou.
Things move quickly as Lou and Rachel begin a relationship though almost instantly we see that they are maybe on slightly different wavelengths regarding what the relationship means. We get a quick scene after they have had sex for the first time where Hoskins is wonderful in his beaming reactions towards quite frankly just how much Lou appreciates getting to have sex with her. Going as far as to even trying to ignore her more dismissive remarks as a guy just high on his life in this moment. Lou continues the relationship but even more strongly becomes an integral part in making Charlotte and Kate more comfortable with the town as home. Hoskins is great in his way of showing how Lou ingratiates within the family so naturally. In part we see him trying to push Rachel to be less defensive even asking technically nosy questions but saying it is just his nature to be so. A sentence that could be obnoxious quite frankly but Hoskins delivers the line with the warmth of genuine interest to become invested with this person not just gossip material. Hoskins is also great with Ryder and Ricci in presenting the gradual steps of becoming more so a father figure with them. Hoskins is so perfectly earnest in the steps and the specific quiet excitement he brings in his every expression where you see the joy he gets out of bringing them joy. One particularly remarkable moment in that regard being when he creates an “Ocean room” for Kate, and just watch impish glee Hoskins brings in seeing their jubilation, which makes Lou just so endearing.
Where Hoskins especially shines, and I think was potentially the trickiest aspect of the role, is portraying Lou challenging Rachel for her lack of commitment which spreads to her even accusing Lou of “using” the children in a certain sense. Hoskins is amazing in every moment of portraying Lou’s frustrations because he brings such a delicate sense of decency in every moment. Hoskins even delivers the line about wanting to hit Rachel with such a strong balance of creating the real sense of anger at her stubbornness while showing the conviction of real concern. Hoskins manages to show that while the anger is real to the point of such violence the concern is of a man who would never actually hit here but just wants to be able to express her love to her. An idea that only becomes stronger to the point Lou proposes to her at a New Year’s party. Hoskins is genuinely just so perfect in the scene where he brings such a powerful combination between the most vigorous of enthusiasm in sharing this declaration with her to the most subdued yet absolutely piercing heartbreak in his reaction as she turns him down. A moment emblematic of his whole performance in this film where he consistently goes for the quieter note and makes it sing all, the more because he can portray Lou as the man wholly listening, wholly wanting to be there, therefore making the rejection of him more painful. Although the resolution of this is off-screen mostly, Hoskins even makes great use of his nearly silent later scenes, such as just his warm loving presence when he shows up to comfort a time of great distress or just the wonderful potent enthusiasm of every second of his performance as we see Lou at the Baseball Hall of Fame. I love Hoskins in this situation because he can portray that specific uncontrollable energy one gets when just overwhelmed with the excitement for something they love to the point it is almost a little bit of a panic in a sense. Theoretically not even a major sequence yet Hoskins manages to create a bit more of an impact by bringing such honesty to every second and make Lou such a convincing average guy throughout. Even while the film itself I didn’t really always believe every character as a person, Hoskins elevates every bit of the script to make Lou absolutely tangible and graciously does so in such modest way.
Mermaids is an okay coming of age story about a teenage girl in the 60’s Charlotte (Winona Ryder) dealing with her single mother Rachel (Cher) who never seems to be able to stay in one place.
The film opens as the family, including also the youngest sister Kate (Christina Ricci), move to a small town in Massachusetts where they meet shop owner Lou played by Bob Hoskins. I have covered Hoskins several times in the past in his various leading roles as an atypical but impressive leading man. This is the first time I am reviewing him for a supporting role where Hoskins is not intended to be the center of attention. Hoskins seemingly respects that idea and gives a performance that is particularly generous in his grace through every scene. As I think given the nature of the film and the part there could have been a tendency to turn his Lou into too much of character to stand out overtly in the narrative and become a caricature. Hoskins instead seems intent on being quietly convincing and adding to a much-needed honesty to his film. When we first meet Hoskins, he brings a nice eager but believable energy as the shop keep who does not mind having a little fun with his costumers. Hoskins has a nice easy charm about it and sets up a nice sense of his instant attraction to Rachel. Hoskins does not make overt just a little glint in his eyes as a quick fascination with the woman who is very quick to speak her mind. I particularly love just his genuine quick laughter from the asides and his way of delivering the responses as just something that energizes Lou.
Things move quickly as Lou and Rachel begin a relationship though almost instantly we see that they are maybe on slightly different wavelengths regarding what the relationship means. We get a quick scene after they have had sex for the first time where Hoskins is wonderful in his beaming reactions towards quite frankly just how much Lou appreciates getting to have sex with her. Going as far as to even trying to ignore her more dismissive remarks as a guy just high on his life in this moment. Lou continues the relationship but even more strongly becomes an integral part in making Charlotte and Kate more comfortable with the town as home. Hoskins is great in his way of showing how Lou ingratiates within the family so naturally. In part we see him trying to push Rachel to be less defensive even asking technically nosy questions but saying it is just his nature to be so. A sentence that could be obnoxious quite frankly but Hoskins delivers the line with the warmth of genuine interest to become invested with this person not just gossip material. Hoskins is also great with Ryder and Ricci in presenting the gradual steps of becoming more so a father figure with them. Hoskins is so perfectly earnest in the steps and the specific quiet excitement he brings in his every expression where you see the joy he gets out of bringing them joy. One particularly remarkable moment in that regard being when he creates an “Ocean room” for Kate, and just watch impish glee Hoskins brings in seeing their jubilation, which makes Lou just so endearing.
Where Hoskins especially shines, and I think was potentially the trickiest aspect of the role, is portraying Lou challenging Rachel for her lack of commitment which spreads to her even accusing Lou of “using” the children in a certain sense. Hoskins is amazing in every moment of portraying Lou’s frustrations because he brings such a delicate sense of decency in every moment. Hoskins even delivers the line about wanting to hit Rachel with such a strong balance of creating the real sense of anger at her stubbornness while showing the conviction of real concern. Hoskins manages to show that while the anger is real to the point of such violence the concern is of a man who would never actually hit here but just wants to be able to express her love to her. An idea that only becomes stronger to the point Lou proposes to her at a New Year’s party. Hoskins is genuinely just so perfect in the scene where he brings such a powerful combination between the most vigorous of enthusiasm in sharing this declaration with her to the most subdued yet absolutely piercing heartbreak in his reaction as she turns him down. A moment emblematic of his whole performance in this film where he consistently goes for the quieter note and makes it sing all, the more because he can portray Lou as the man wholly listening, wholly wanting to be there, therefore making the rejection of him more painful. Although the resolution of this is off-screen mostly, Hoskins even makes great use of his nearly silent later scenes, such as just his warm loving presence when he shows up to comfort a time of great distress or just the wonderful potent enthusiasm of every second of his performance as we see Lou at the Baseball Hall of Fame. I love Hoskins in this situation because he can portray that specific uncontrollable energy one gets when just overwhelmed with the excitement for something they love to the point it is almost a little bit of a panic in a sense. Theoretically not even a major sequence yet Hoskins manages to create a bit more of an impact by bringing such honesty to every second and make Lou such a convincing average guy throughout. Even while the film itself I didn’t really always believe every character as a person, Hoskins elevates every bit of the script to make Lou absolutely tangible and graciously does so in such modest way.


25 comments:
Happy that Hoskins got another five.
Ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Louis: Thoughts on the Gatto trailer.
Regarding Being Heumann, A story better told in the documentary Crip Camp. Like CODA, Sian Heder goes for the aggressively twee route with every moment needing a quip or a comedic setup to go along with it. The film wants to give reality to people whose story is infrequently told yet the film is slim on the moments of genuine humanity and would rather make everyone an eccentric caricature where we only get emotional when we get SUPER emotional. It doesn’t help that we also get the most on the nose needle drops of course and just chooses to be at least slightly phony despite the authentic casting.
Madeley - 2
Ruffalo - 2.5
O'Brien - 2.5
Delp - 3
Delaney - 2.5
Fisher - 2
Thornton - 3
Tolliver - 3
Beavers - 2.5
Colindrez - 2.5
Harvard - 3
Rush-Reese - 3
Pilkington - 3
Brill - 2
Louis: Thoughts on Madeley and Ruffalo.
Louis: Your thoughts on the rest of the cast of Being Heumann?
With Being Heumann having a podium finish for the People's Choice Award at TIFF, I'm afraid we may have to deal with another Heder film disrupting awards season.
Unless Apple TV has a another major contender I'm forgetting.
Luke: Your thoughts on the shortlist for the James Bond candidates, and your preferred choice of those.
Bryan: Lowden probably needs it more than anyone. Callum Turner does absolutely nothing for me. Elordi and O'Connor don't need it. Rumours are going round that Villeneuve really wants Pattinson which I'm dreading because I do not want him locked into that franchise for a decade (whether it's 3 or 4 films) and he might have to finish his run of Batman after 2 films. I much prefer seeing him in more challenging roles.
Luke: I agree on Lowden. I also don’t want to see Pattinson tied down to another franchise either.
Luke:
Cher - 3(For me as written the character isn’t quite there. She’s fine in bringing a general brassiness although she’s typically far more impressive in all the other lead performances I’ve seen from her. The whole wanderlust or untrusting qualities are too surface as written I would say for Cher to really dive deep into this as her performance in Mask comparatively is so much more cutting in every way but again working with a better script and direction to be sure.)
Ryder - 3.5(Thought she got a little more going here than Cher but only just enough in my book. As even here the character’s fixation on Catholicism as being anti her mom doesn’t quite come across as more than a comedic beat and in turn too much of it is stuck there. I think she brings a generally charming presence and does what she can although again the writing isn’t quite there.)
Ricci - 3(Doesn’t get too much to do than be the cute kid, but she’s believable in a natural way and certainly cute.)
Schoeffling - 2.5(Bland and forgettable love interest.)
Eh Puss and Boots already did the 9 lives bit pretty perfectly so that angle was really intriguing me nor did anything else stand-out too much other than Pixar embracing the Spider-Verse style. Not that it looks bad but did not look like something that will going into the great animated echelon.
Madeley - (I’ll say she certainly is going for selling the tone Heder has decided for the film and that is my problem with performance. As either her note is big and brassy or it is deeply deeply empathetic both portrayed with the same intense expressions throughout. Man does she emote HARD, but boy did I not believe at all. And I’ll say yes a particular example of script and direction, they wanted the “in your face” lead character but it always felt like a contrivance to me not a genuine person within Madeley’s work. Like Heder she joins in going for the big neon lights and those neon lights I found quite grating.)
Ruffalo - (I mean mostly this is just him hitting the semi-comedic beat of being overly flustered then has one scene where he is then suddenly quietly dignified in his mentorly way. A curious choice script wise in particular in really barely depicting the change of heart but just goes into the obvious approach of the film. Ruffalo I don’t even hate here like I do with some of his bad performances, but just found him stuck in an uninteresting loop.)
Lucas:
Basically the 2’s are either over the top or deeply bland. The 2.5’s are mostly kind of there. The 3’s are working still in mostly one note roles but they at least find some honesty in there within their performances at least.
Mouse is very much a variation on a song of Ghostlight where the focus is less on the artistry, though that is part of it, and more on the grief. It is a largely an effective film, though I think a little overlong, there is one character who is just kind of over the top and for me never quite kind of went that extra step to something truly exceptional. Having said that, a wholly good film aided greatly by a fantastic turn from the nearly always wonderful Sophie Okonedo but also a nice step up for Katherine Mallen Kupferer taking the lead this time around. Where the film succeeds is showing just the messiness of the process, the brutality of moments in the dealing while also finding moments of genuine warmth and comfort however also showing they too don’t last forever. I also liked that just a bit of a change of pace how the artistic expression ends up maybe not being quite the right medicine this time around.
Okonedo - 5
Mallen Kupferer - 4.5
Coleman - 4
Mallen - 4
Nolan - 3
Vellani - 3.5
Pierce - 3.5
Marshall - 2
Delighted to see Okonedo get a 5 from you. Is she a co-lead or supporting in your books?
Calvin:
Supporting for me though definitely in a grey area as the first act it isn't a question, she then does have many scenes from her perspective but I feel they are always briefer particularly compared to the scenes focused on Mallen Kupferer.
Louis: For a hypothetical Kurosawa political thriller, what do you think of this name: The House of Betrayal?
Mifune as a seasoned politician, Kagawa as his wife, Shimura as his old mentor, Nakadai and Yamazaki as younger politicians.
Thoughts on Olivia Thirlby, Byron Bowers, and Joe Pantoliano in Wonder Man?
Louis: What are the most against type roles you can think of for these actors that you still believe would've been good choices for them?
Robert Downey Jr.
Samuel L. Jackson
Jack Nicholson
Christopher Walken
Jim Carrey
Colin Farrell
Brendan Fraser
Jeremy Renner
Louis: Your thoughts on Slow Horses S6?
I thought season 6 was fairly underwhelming myself.
Ytrewq: does Christopher Walken really have a type though?
so, there is a new version of Harry Potter coming out soon. Call me Jon Snow, because i don't want it. I am vehemently against the defining pop culture franchise of my generation being rebooted ... well, during my lifetime, but BEFORE I'M THIRTY?! Not to mention that it doesn't look good at all. Cannot wait to not watch that. I don't even get what Joanne is getting out if this, no matter how much money she gets for this, she will have already donated more in the past ...
anyway, as i see myself as the biggest Potter stan on here i see it as my job to suggest what this reboot SHOULD look like
I will need help on one though, and that is Peter Pettigrew, i have absolutely no idea whom to pick there?
Vernon Dursley: Mark Addy
Petunia Dursley: Ruth Wilson
Hagrid: Rory McCann
Dumbledore: James Cosmo
McGonagall: yeah, McTeer is spot on
Filch: Mackenzie Crook
Molly Weasley: Sally Hawkins
Arthur Weasley: Martin Freeman
Quirrell: Robert Aramayo
Lockhart: Rufus Sewell
Mad-Eye: Lee Arenberg
Ludo Bagman: Simon Pegg
Barty Crouch Sr: Richard E. Grant
Umbridge: Olivia Colman
Kingsley Shacklebolt: Chiwetel Ejiofor
Slughorn: Jonathan Pryce
Cornelius Fudge: Eddie Marsan
Rufus Scrimgeur: Hugh Grant
Aberforth: Peter Dinklage
Lupin: I hear Iwan Rheon is really good, BUT THIS HAS TO BE JAMES MCAVOY I MEAN COME ON!
Sirius: Riz Ahmed
Snape: Ben Whishaw
Lucius Malfoy: Andy Serkis
Narzissa Malfoy: Eva Green
Belatrix: Naomi Watts
Voldemort: Malcolm McDowell
Although Whishaw and Ahmed could very well switch roles
Thoughts?
Cut Dinklage, that was a thought process that i didn't delete in time, he's way too young to be Cosmo's brother, put Jared Harris there
Tim: I guess "weird, calm, Noo Yawkish" is his type, even if this idea of him people have became much more exaggerated as he aged.
Anyway I also won't be watching this (for reasons other than the reboot being completely redundant), but I will say that Whishaw and Ahmed are a bit too attractive for Snape, it would've been better to do find someone who looks like an unkempt basement dweller, similiar to how he was described in a book. Plus McDowell fits the part like a glove, but it would've been nuts if they threw all their chips in and went with Rowan Atkinson, who was an original choice for the role.
I never really had interest in a Harry Potter TV Remake because it was inevitable that the supporting cast wasn't gonna have the same level of talent across the board as the films had.
8000’s:
Maybe just betrayal as Kurosawa often liked his one word titles which translates to uragiri which sounds pretty good to me.
Harris:
Thirlby - (Very small role of honestly two scenes but she does offer a genuine sense of history in her two scenes. Bringing a sense of the care of her character beyond the struggle of the relationship where you do see something deeper even though the role is quite simplistic as written. Thirlby finds some dimensions though even with such simplistic intentions.)
Bowers - (Though he was kind of stiff more than anything, although I feel that was part of the point of the character as kind of this out of place hero type. In that sense I don’t think he was bad because his kind of bad performance fit the guy who just seems kind of out of place in all that he is doing. It worked well enough even in a very specific sense.)
Pantoliano - (An entertaining riff on himself where this is honestly one of his most subdued performances as himself. Pantoliano’s skill in playing it is pretty straightforward as a guy mostly appreciative and even pretty empathetic in his moment of defending his past against Trevor’s accusations. It’s brief but good then we get his late bit where basically he does a reprise of his betrayal from The Matrix, hitting that note quite nicely albeit very briefly.)
Ytrewq:
Robert Downey Jr. - Harry Caul or George Smiley.
Samuel L. Jackson - Arn Peeples
Jack Nicholson - Napoleon (70’s Nicholson only)
Christopher Walken - (Hmm the notion of a lack of type rings true particularly if you consider his entire career. Maybe Han Solo? Or like Hamlet or something.)
Jim Carrey - Travis Henderson
Colin Farrell - (I mean I would’ve said something akin to the Penguin.
Brendan Fraser - Mad Man Mundt
Jeremy Renner - Mr. Smith
Razor:
I thought the plot developments were frankly pretty dumb this season particularly in terms of how our hired killers seemed to have homing beacons on everyone meanwhile the horses also frequently acted dumb even beyond being screwups. I also hate when one of the most interesting characters exits for the sake of a stupid setup. Killing off characters can be fine but this felt like just a waste of dramatic potential. In turn having so many just hanging out at a house for most of the season also felt like a waste, seems like Shirley will have something more interesting to do based on the next season preview, hope that is the case. I did enjoy some character interaction beats, most of the performances, that I’m certainly going to keep watching but plotting here felt especially sloppy this time around.
Louis: What are your thoughts on the cast of Mouse? And what character does Mr. Smith for Jeremy Renner refer to on that list?
Post a Comment