Best Actor

Friday, 15 February 2019

Alternate Best Actor 2018: Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly in Stan & Ollie

Steve Coogan did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a BAFTA, and John C. Reilly did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a Golden Globe, for portraying Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy respectively in Stan & Ollie.

Stan & Ollie is a delightful film following the later years of the comedy duo as they embark on a European tour.

As a longtime fan of Laurel & Hardy, I'll admit I had a keen interest in seeing an eventual film to be made about the duo. Although I was well aware that there wasn't anything too "dramatic" within their lives, there was some potential within their later years of falling into semi-obscurity to only still found a resounding love of the public. In turn I'll admit I did try to imagine a dream casting for the pair, Stan was not one I could foresee easily but I never had anyone else in mind other than John C. Reilly in the role of Ollie. So naturally I was overjoyed to hear the frankly perfect casting choice come to fruition. I'll fully admit though I was less impressed initially at hearing Steve Coogan casting as Stan, feeling originally that it was a lazy choice merely based upon Stan & Ollie's director Jon S. Baird's previous collaboration with Coogan, Philomena. I'll admit I still wasn't quite convinced after seeing the trailer for the film, but things changed during the opening minutes of the film, where we see the pair in the prime, on the set of Way Out West, as they go through their personal lives and the slight tension between them, particularly Stan, and producer Hal Roach. Although the pair of Reilly and Coogan made two brief cameos on the awards trail, they were overlooked, meanwhile one performance also as a real person, also based around the imitation of a real person, has been reaping all of the awards glory. Well Coogan and Reilly's embodiment of these comedy legends frankly makes that awards winning performance look like a rank amateur.

Well in this opening scene the first thing that happened was that Reilly lives up to the promise of his casting quite immediately. He has a bit of help with some makeup, that he actually wears far better than most actors, as it seems so naturally part of his face, where he always did resemble Ollie to a certain degree. Well here he just simply becomes Ollie. Yes, yes one can always make this claim but honestly I just forgot I was watching Reilly here almost immediately. This is as he captures every aspect of Ollie so naturally and with such ease. This is with his so very specific voice of that slightly high pitched timbre yet with that sort of hidden deeply southern gentlemen bravado within it. It is such a specific that Ollie had that Reilly realizes not just as this surface imitation, but the fully textured voice of a person. It is so precise in just how accurate it is, yet so effortless in this approach. You just seem to meet the man, as even the way he greets his future wife the script girl Lucille (Shirley Henderson), with his oh so light and charming delivery of a "a sweet for my sweet" as he hands her a donut, I could only say "that's Oliver Hardy!". His physicality even in the role is simply of Hardy, which is a very specific, that frankly most other *ahem* husky comedians have tried to replicate. This being this lightness in movement and step despite heaviness of the personage. Reilly has this down pat in every little gesture of the hands, and even his walk is of this swim rather than a stomp. It is an amazing transformation that simply is Ollie.

Now how about Steve Coogan, who I had a my doubts about? Well he already has a bit of a tougher road in a certain sense in that he has no additional "help" so to speak in that his appearance isn't really altered in any great way. Coogan also is far less who I initially think of Stan Laurel at any point as his usual presence is typically far more cynical and harsh than would fit ole Stannie. Well, any doubts of mine for Coogan were dashed just as my hopes for Reilly were realized. Coogan too becomes Stan, which is particularly outstanding as it becomes almost impossible to describe exactly how. Coogan just tweaks himself in such a slight way to find the specific mannerisms of Stan, that it is absolutely fascinating. There is an even greater aspect of this that I will get to in a moment, but just every minor physical gesture too Coogan finds is just as Stan was. His voice even just is Stan's again, and again it is amazing. In that his accent just finds that certain lightness that evokes Stan's very airy English accent. Again though it is that physicality that is so specific to the once silent comedian that is so essential to portraying him, that again Coogan masters. This is as his walk and demeanor is just of that almost scarecrow esque manner, and a purposeful broad manner of his movements. It again just simply is the man in Coogan's hands, and like Reilly it is stunning how authentic it all feels. It never feels like an act as soon as this scene begins and both just are our Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy for the duration of the film.

Of course that is just step one in a sense, as both actors even manage to bring slight variations in this between their first scenes, and few flashbacks, against the older versions of the actors, where both, particularly Reilly, convey the wear of the years on the men. Not to some extreme degree, but with the right sense that reflects the age of the men properly as they embark on the tour. Of course the embodiment doesn't end there as the men are not the men as they were as the characters of Stan & Ollie. Stan being obviously much smarter, and also more introverted than the character of Stannie, against Ollie who was a whole lot less grumpy in reality, and technically was perhaps not leader of the two, as was the case in the films. The team of Reilly and Coogan, are also brilliant in creating the distinctions of the characters between the real people against the film versions of themselves. Reilly again masters this with the slight, though oh so hilarious, intensity found in the character of Ollie right down to the flustered breaking the fourth wall stare. That moment, where we see a fantastical creation of a never made film of Robin Good, with Coogan and Reilly, I'll be honest you could have told me it was lost real footage, as Reilly's moment as pure film Ollie, is absolute perfection of the recreation of a screen presence. The same is true for Coogan, who also masters that slightly changed manner of delivery of that of the simpleton with that sort lip smacking method of the dumb man slowly finding his words.

Now the film has the two specifically recreate the style of the performers in a several different scenes. This could have easily become tiresome if the two were not on point, and not believable as the duo. I'll admit I might have been okay with the understudy version of them, but I have to admit, as a giant fan of the two, Coogan and Reilly become the real deal. They have every bit of the physical comedy down pat, with that exact comedic timing in between the two that made them legends of the form. Also unlike some recreations from 2018, these two boys do their own singing, except for one instance where even the real Stan Laurel did not do his own singing. Their version of the "The Trail of the Lonesome Pine" is something I was quite looking forward to I'll admit since one of the reasons I knew Reilly would be great for the role is his magnificent singing voice. Thankfully we were granted Reilly singing again and once again it is wonderful to hear him belt out a tune. Although with the eloquence of Ollie, while Coogan offers some fine support, just as Stan did, the two are again a delight, though I will leave the note that we NEED Reilly to be put into a proper musical, that man's musical talents are underused, however I digress. Each recreation though carries that some splendid wonder as it does feel like a cheap imitation but a proper realization of the duo's comedic greatness. They do both go a bit further though as there are moments that are not one for one, and Coogan and Reilly still find the timing, and the spirit of the men. They are absolutely and consistently entertaining to the point I frankly want the two just simply fully Laurel & Hardy feature, they're that good.

Of course as much as this film is a nice trip down cinematic legacy lane the film does have some dramatic elements. I actually love this aspect of the film that it focuses upon, it doesn't treat it as a trite element. Now mind you there was not truly great tragedy about the men, yet what they do include here is a whole lot more pointed than that far more awarded biopic puff piece. This is in the way that the two men were very different in personality and perspective. Ollie being just a loving generous man, of perhaps too great of appetites but not in a way that alienated others. Reilly brings this to life with such immense charm but with the right balance as he conveys the sense of darkness only within the frustrations that naturally come from his life, and the results of his weight. Reilly finds the right balance in the interpersonal personality of the man being so warm and endearing, that is his basic setting. I love one moment where we see his frustration at losing money on one of his bets as he tosses away a paper in anger, before see a group of kids watching him. Reilly's switch to a oh so pleasant little wave of his tie with big bright smile. Reilly doesn't play this as a jump into a facade, but rather the way of the man falling upon really his inherent nature. This is opposed to Coogan as Stan who shows that he certainly has a certain charm, but this is within a certain intense driven manner. Coogan finds really the right incisiveness of the man fitting to a man with a fixed artistic vision. There is the right passion in it, that is properly internalized by Coogan's work that shows it as something that creates a frigid quality at times though as side effect of that need to bring his ideas to the world.

The two then develop this very specific chemistry between the two. I love Coogan and Reilly together as Stan and Ollie, being the people they were off stage. The two find a low key loving quality that is given the right understated quality to the point you could forget about it. The years of working and really being together just are exuded in every understanding interaction. They in the same though realize the right tension, of course in the end the type of tension that can exist in any great friendship, with Reilly finding that passive attitude in Ollie that contrasts against the intensity Coogan brings with Stan. We finds something similar when we see the two with their wives, Ollie with the openly affectionate Lucille, and Stan with the rather direct Ida (Nina Arianda). Both women firmly love each men, just the two go about it with very different personalities. Again Reilly and Coogan are great in realizing these separate relationships. This with Reilly having such a sweet chemistry with Henderson in this nearly uncompromising care the two share that is so convincing and wonderful. Meanwhile with Stan, Coogan and Arianda show a newer relationship, and again fitting to his personality, a rawer more intense infatuation between the two. Both though just create a vivid understanding of each relationship and just show that little more of each man. Now the major conflict then comes in their personalities clashing, which again is not a dramatic break up but a fight that really a proper friends will have at one time or another. This coming just from earned pent up frustrations of the years that Reilly and Coogan bring such an honesty to. Their fight scene is absolutely fantastic as they each play it as these earned anger of old wounds. Stan for Ollie having worked with another partner in an undermining move against Stan by Hal Roach, and Ollie against Stan for Stan always seeming more occupied with their legacy as performers than their friendship. Their fight simply feels real as the two call upon the personalities with such a sadness evoked in Reilly in his expression of the heartbreak in the colder Stan, against the anger that Coogan brings out of a man feeling burdened by the lack of ambition of his partner. I especially adore the heartbreaking little face of betrayal in Reilly as he turns around, after Stan throws bread at him at the end of their fight. Again though this is not earth shattering for them but rather more release. It does take a bit of recovery which again feels genuine. I especially adore the moment where Coogan plays Stan, playing the character of Stan, trying to build the bridge back between the two. Coogan effectively showing that he puts on a facade of the act, thought trying to use it to to be more outgoing in the moment. After Hardy falls ill though the two do come together again such a tender moment as they forget their differences and share their very real mutual love. Both in the moment again earn by just calling upon this sense of understanding even in their difference as each so quietly deliver their apologies so authentic to two life long friends. I can't praise these performances enough, because they did something I didn't think could be done. They brought back the great duo and did so with such loving detail. They capture it all in their timing, their specific mannerisms, their banter, their physical comedy, and even in that certain of joy performance you could always sense from the duo. Although this film isn't the Amadeus, of comedians, it doesn't need to be, as the two express what was great about the duo as cinematic performers, well giving the chance to meet them as people. Coogan and Reilly both did the legends proud and there's no more I could ask for.

Thursday, 14 February 2019

Alternate Best Actor 2018: John Huston in The Other Side of the Wind

John Huston did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Jake Hanneford in The Other Side of the Wind.

John Huston as a director in a film by Orson Welles about a director making a film he cannot finish in a film that was never finished is a setup enough to make one's head spin. I'll admit Orson Welles's final film is more fascinating in an outward examination of all that went in around it, than the film itself, though I should say the story is more fascinating than a great deal of films so that is no major criticism. The casting of Huston, rather than Welles playing the part of the director, is one of the more potent aspects of the material. Of course the two's connection actually began when the two became directors. Both premiered their first films in 1941, both making legitimate classics, Welles with his groundbreaking Citizen Kane, and Huston with the exceptionally entertaining The Maltese Falcon. The two's connection went beyond that with their matching multifaceted talents as writers and eventually actors as well. A third connection though is also their schism in a sense as the two despite making two of the most influential and acclaimed directorial debuts of all time, had far different careers. Welles having a troubled history in Hollywood for the rest of his career in his difficulty in finding consistent funding for projects, and also his own personal choices that frequently edged towards self-sabotage. Huston on the other hand found consistent success throughout his career seemingly through his ability to play the game, knowing when to sacrifice in order to fulfill his passion projects. Of course this is fascinating in that despite his success Huston was never seen as the studio's pageboy but also as a maverick, just a far more successful one.

This leads to this most bizarre of projects that Welles called upon his fellow actor/director to play the part of the maverick director. Of course both men were that, yet very different. Welles essentially framing his whole life as one big con or magic trick that he performed on the public. The legend of Huston, that by all accounts he was without the frequent alienation of others unlike Welles, was that of essentially the ultimate man's man. The casting then here is perhaps one more trick it seems that Welles wanted to play, though he perhaps struggled to pull it off on the worthiest of opponents that was Huston. This is as many have figured that Hanneford is a stand in for Welles, perhaps that it is true, though maybe Welles wished it to be a stand in for Huston, and accidentally made it about himself. But before I get too much into theories I probably should introduce this performance a bit. Huston as an actor was essentially a guarantee. Huston didn't seek roles, roles looked to find Huston as he was guaranteed to give that impressive if not oppressive presence to any film he would appear. One could not seemingly ask for a better choice then for the godlike, in the eyes of his legions of followers and fans, director that is Jake Hanneford. One would like to assume the voice of God might approach Huston's in its ease of force and gravitas that is evoked from a single word from his mouth.

If one examines this performance simply as the all powerful director, well one could not ask for a greater force of presence than that is Huston. Huston is only really glanced at for the first half hour of the film yet one takes note of every word from the man. There is that conviction of one's own aura essentially that is remarkable, and frankly only possible for someone like Huston in the role. The idea of the man supposedly in his element is upon the film set where he is the word of God. We witness Hanneford's film within a film, called fittingly the other side of the wind, where the film is series of observation and slowly growing interaction of a young man played by a young star, with the enigmatic femme fatale played by the enigmatic actress played by the enigmatic Oja Kodar. One scene of the film still features the voice of Hanneford during a sex scene where he continually implores the actress to emasculate the actor as much as possible. The voice in this scene is striking as performed by Huston's deep baritone. The sense of control though is certainly evident in the moment of course, as almost this ghastly unseen monster though trying to inflict a humiliation upon his victim. Again that is a given but what is so notable is how unpleasant the situation becomes in the way there is this lustful need within even the voice, a sense of a god wishing to destroy his creation, or at least abuse it as he pleases.

Back to my theory though as this film is not about the greatness of a director, but rather the downfall of one. As we follow the director on a very long night of his birthday party where his friends, followers, fanatics and collaborators gather to screen his film, and supposedly for a night of celebration. Although ostensibly Huston is the lead of the film, everything must takes second place to the designs of Welles, as the perspective of Hanneford is often a distant one. Hanneford is not obviously a Welles stand in precisely as we find him to not be a trickster Welles, but rather the macho force, that has drawn comparisons to John Ford and William Wellman, but I'd argue is perhaps closest to Huston. After all Huston, like Hanneford, did attempt to stay relevant within the new wave of his directors in many of his later efforts, much we see Hanneford in his impossible to decipher piece. Of course a film like Huston's Wise Blood was not impossible to decipher, and the titular film in the end is naturally far more akin to Welles's later work. Of course why not be Hanneford it seems in the early party scenes where Huston makes for quite the man of the hour. When Hanneford speaks within the platitudes of art, and his visions of power, Huston could not speak with a greater charisma or satisfaction. This is a man wholly within his element, even as he screams to high heavens of his own godhood while also explaining the womanhood of god all the same time, to which Huston delivers a devious glee of satisfaction. A pure unadulterated ego so fitting to a legend.

One criticism that has been lobbied against this film is that it is misogynistic, which couldn't be more wrong for multitude of reasons, the least of them being that Kodar co-wrote the film. Of course anyone lobbing the complaint to me shows a surface examination upon the film, as there is clear distinction between the view of women in Hanneford's film, against Welles's film. In Hanneford's film the women are objectified, though actually everyone is, Welles's film on the other hand focuses on the destruction of the male ego. The main target being Hanneford that seems to be peeled away at both the loving theories of his success, and the pointed critiques of the auteur. Huston's performance, though distantly framed, is a compelling one where that fierce presence becomes all the more intense as he seems to soak in every moment of it. Huston plays this in part with a snide passive aggressive venom to his onlookers, but also growing discontent in his eyes as he seems to wish the death of all those around him. This becomes all the more evident as Hanneford partakes in a bit of gun play to shoot off the heads of all his friends, in mannequin, form. This is the one moment where we see Hanneford in his greatest joy, as Huston exudes a delighted sneer upon his face as "kills" every single one of his pawns. His destruction of his creation perhaps being his greatest love. A compulsion that again feels far closer to Welles, than Huston, who by nearly all accounts was simply a legitimate legend, rather than the frustrating one that was Welles. Now this whole film again seemed a bit of a trick, that probably never even gave Huston a second thought as he found a resurgence if anything after the filming, as Welles attempts to destroy the macho director in Hanneford. Huston fails to fit the bill of Welles's criticism as a man and a director, however he is more than game to realize a personification of Welles's own self-destruction.

A self-destruction that is different from the anguish that stems from Hanneford's latent homosexuality that he tries to hide through sheer machismo, but in a similar painful state of mind within Welles who almost seemed as though he could never leave the idea that his initial success in the world of art that involved, according himself, conning himself into a theater group. Huston realizes though this as quite potent through the bruised ego that he depicts in such a violent display of hate as he lashes out at his most ardent critic, a female one, who seems to know exactly how to strike towards the heart of him. Huston's thrashing of the man's masculinity being destroyed is earth shattering as a reveals the desperate man being all the bravado with all his insecurities on full display. The final thread of the man's sanity though comes at a quieter place, just as Welles's downfall was not that of a thunderstorm of excess but rather whimpers of fulfilling roles and duties that seemed far below his talent. Both men though seem to succumb some truth they seem to believe in themselves that they hate, Welles as the fake magician where all his sleight of hand became too well known, that he was left with only the cheapest tricks to get by. Hanneford's on the other hand is left greeting his final guest, his leading man who quit his film, just before he will go to die in a car accident most likely a suicide. In this moment though Hanneford tries to come onto the actor failing miserably, as Huston portrays this as this most unnerving display of a man not embracing his true nature, but rather giving up on the illusion he had crafted for himself. Huston's little slight sleazy smile, hides this horrible glint of dissatisfaction of self. A film gasp of a man who cannot live with not being a god among men. Welles claims he was giving Huston this great part, as a gift that he took away from himself. A trick one gain, perhaps to try to make Huston culpable as a target of the criticism, but in the end Huston gave up nothing, delivery just a compelling turn perfect for what seems to be some confession by Welles. Not a confession of homosexuality, but of this inability to maintain his ego. Mind you Huston without a doubt had a powerful ego, something he could wield, as even shown in this performance and in his state of mind that never seemed burdened by the troubled production. Welles perhaps was trying to destroy such an idea there, but failed with the indestructible Huston. Welles's ego on the other hand ended up being the seeds of his own destruction as a filmmaker, and this film seems to be his final testament of that belief. This is as finally seeing the film after so many years, one can find such vulnerabilities within the mind of the man that made it, meanwhile finally seeing the performance of John Huston is merely a testament of the man's immense talent.

Wednesday, 13 February 2019

Alternate Best Actor 2018: Matt Dillon in The House That Jack Built

Louis: Matt Dillon did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character of The House That Jack Built.

Verne: Why did you say that?

Louis: Force of habit I suppose, probably why I'm in this current situation.

(Sounds of two people wading through unpleasant water...smells)

Louis: I have to say this is a pretty pleasant dark pit, reeks a bit, strangely blurry for a real place.

Verne: Why seems appropriate for where we are.

Louis: Hell?

Verne: No the mind of Lars van Trier, it's easy to get the two confused I know.

Louis: They do seem to go hand in hand in their general unpleasantness.

Verne: Are you sure you want to continue then, as it doesn't get brighter from here...perhaps tell me about how great Toshiro Mifune is some more...

Louis: I might have done that enough at this point, though not too much, no no but really I gotta make it through this sludge, that's why I'm here. I mean I did review Eddie Redmayne in The Danish Girl.

Verne: That certainly is a trial in itself, however I believe that was made by Satan.

Louis: Hey Tom Hooper isn't that bad.

Verne: Well he shall ever be known as Satan for beating David Fincher you know, and he too dwells in the dark. Care to see his adaptation of Cats?

Louis: Please no, let's avoid that.

Verne: Don't worry that's the 90th layer of hell filled with cheap wallpaper. We're currently only in the 75th just halfway point towards the collective dramas of Adam McKay.

Louis: I thought we weren't in Hell?

Verne: As I said it is easy to confuse things here.

Louis: Well it certainly feels that way.

Verne: Do you not appreciate Henry: Portrait of Serial Killer?

Louis: I'd say I do an extent, unpleasant as it, but this is more Henry by the way Monsieur Verdoux.

Verne: Who doesn't love Chaplin?

Louis: Well we do have fast motion walking, title cards, fooling around with a cop, and just messing with props in a way one would assume you're suppose to laugh at.

Verne: You refer to Chaplin's The Circus?

Louis: No this is The House That Jack Built. Of course we see him bash people's heads in, choke women to death, and just other random acts of brutality. All in graphic gory detail....but with still that same sort of silliness as a Tramp skit.

Verne: Well what leads you to talk of this then?

Louis: Force of habit, and we are in the right place in von Trier's mind.

Verne: But title says you're talking about Matt Dillon.

Louis: Yes but it necessary to speak of one, to even broach the other.

Verne: Then you best post a picture of him, lest your more ritually minded readers become perturbed.

Louis: Very well.

Louis: There he is.

Verne: Yes and why is he here exactly?

Louis: That's a good question, watching this film is perhaps the definition of some sort of masochism. But falls into the idea of separating the elements of the film from the whole.

Verne: Why how do you feel about the whole here.

Louis: Well it's a piece of garbage, where you watch a director masturbate in front of you for over two hours. Not the pleasant experience.

Verne: Could we not just say naval gazing?

Louis: No, for von Trier, the bit of the ribald is always needed.

Verne: You don't seem to care for the film, then why was it not on your worst of the year list?

Louis: Well that would give von Trier exactly what he desires now wouldn't it. A man who says he's sympathizes with Hitler, for the sake to be the the level of edginess near that guy in your high school who drew pictures of people with knives sticking out of their eyes.

Verne: It appears you're getting off topic.

Louis: I suppose so, as I'm suppose to be talking about Matt Dillon.

Verne: A fine actor.

Louis: I don't have a problem with him. In fact I find he does an utterly splendid job of delving out the finest bit of excrement out of his mouth. I mean it is really impressive how Dillon can espouse with such precision. I haven't seen such notable passing of mouth waste than that old atheist episode of South Park.

Verne: Is the film not a confession by von Trier that his work is excrement though, Jack does go to a fiery demise after all.

Louis: Should be a fairer point than it is. He does love to splice murders with "fine art"...much like von Trier like to combine the putrid with artistry. But I'm suppose to be talking about Matt Dillon. Who as I said does a fine job of speaking von Trier's delusions into the world. His work is devoted. He knows what he needs to do in the part, and technically become this thing in the film that one can witness an artistry, if misguided in its use.

Verne: Devotion is good is it not?

Louis: It is, and I appreciate the art of performance even in separation from any atrocious thing it may be intertwined with.

Verne: Raul Julia in Street Fighter?

Louis: No do not compare the two! Street Fighter has far more value. But I will admit Dillon's performance is an intriguing waste of time as he portrays the shades of von Trier's obnoxious treatise. Dillon is on the top of any form of creep it appears von Trier wishes to relate. This could be the sleazy charmer, Dillon is that. It could be the random creep, Dillon is that. It could be human guano with delusions of grandeur that results in more guano. Dillon is all these things, as he should be, and is convincing in making them one reprehensible act. His act though more forgivable I suppose.

Verne: How much of this performance does he simply funnel von Trier's voice you think?

Louis: Long enough to be an impressive display of consistent detached misanthropy, to the point no one can say Matt Dillon did not do his job.

Verne: Sorry to break topic, but was that Monsieur Verdoux comparison.

Louis: Something as tiresome, in the serial killer explaining his crimes by evoking the great murderers of history, as some excuse, to which Chaplin's wrongly put forth. He did not do so with as much of a blithe disregard for good taste. That brings me back to Dillon though who does a remarkable work in realizing the same blithe, even darkly humorous, edge in his performance. Mind you it makes the film no less tolerable but within his own bubble one could easily foresee this portrayal of evil being used for good instead of evil.

Verne: You view the works of von Trier as evil do you.

Louis: Not quite, but his general, and frankly random callousness. A man with with no hardships in his existence, though with the attitude of some survivor of a massacre that never occurred. It is that approach, that amounts to no more than a guy who shoves a rotting rabbit's head in your face just to disgust you.

Verne: Again though are Jack's views not in the end proven to be untrue?

Louis: Not really, as von Trier shows his own films as these great art creations as supported by Jack's voice over, and in the end denounces nothing. He aspires to be Jack and just an attitude is more worth an eye roll, than a gasp. He is correct though in showing how obnoxious a man can be who insists upon his own brilliance. The idea that any one would have to ponder on Jack's thoughts is as laughable as it is disgusting.

Verne: Are you not here to talk of Dillon?

Louis: I'll admit I keep getting side tracked, difficult not to, as Dillon is isolation what one would explain as a compelling turn, it is the material around him that just wastes away any interest so very quickly. His performance maintains a consistent quality and elements one would typically describe as chilling.

Verne: You don't describe him as chilling here.

Louis: No, as the film is too tiresome to become chilling, even if what Dillon does in his own place should theoretically be so. Dillon is not even one note, he does find the appropriate variation within the various states of Jack's temperament. He even does convey what one would assume is a great emotion as Jack stares off into Heaven in one moment. Again who really cares, but Dillon's work is on point on his end of things. His performance is frankly more than the tiresome act that is the film. His performance although plays with that callousness does so in attempt to create a singular creation that lives in itself, rather than some lame self reflective nonsense.

Verne: It sounds as though you like his performance?

Louis: Technically I do, and it is a performance that would've been nice to witness in an actual film rather than an obnoxious exercise, that really would have been fitting if at the end of the film it cut to von Trier eating a carrot and going "Ain't I a stinker". It is a most impressive tool for a tool.

Verne: Then what rating would you give him, you know if you don't put the Mifunes up you will be asked.

Louis: A 4.5.

Verne: Where's the picture.

Louis: This film doesn't deserve it. Why are you here anyways?

Verne: Looking for work after Jim Varney died. Thought von Trier's mind is a good place as any to find work.

Louis: Eh good luck with that I'm off to write about The Other Side of the Wind, now there's some director mastur.....naval gazing one can enjoy.

Verne: But we must continue this discussion....let's watch the film again.

(Louis sees fiery pit, and jumps in.)

Tuesday, 12 February 2019

Alternate Best Actor 2018

And the Nominees Were Not:

John C. Reilly in The Sisters Brothers

Joaquin Phoenix in The Sisters Brothers

Jakob Cedergren in The Guilty

Ethan Hawke in First Reformed

Paddy Considine in Journeyman

John Huston in The Other Side of The Wind

Predict those five, these five or both:

Steve Coogan in Stan & Ollie

John C. Reilly in Stan & Ollie

Marcello Fonte in Dogman

Ryan Gosling in First Man

Matt Dillon in The House That Jack Built (Don't watch it)

Ben Foster in Leave No Trace

And For Prediction Purposes:

Reilly out of the brothers.

Coogan out of the comedy team.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2018: Results

10. Russell Hornsby in The Hate U Give - Hornsby gives a very strong performance realizing the intense determination of his character based around both his past hardships and his genuine love for his family.

Best Scene: How to behave when pulled over.

9. Peter Bogdonavich in The Other Side of the Wind - Bogdonavich's performance, 40 years in its making, is a surprisingly nuanced portrayal of the vulnerable ego of a man who built his own legacy by imitating his mentor.

Best Scene: Trying to tell Hanneford the truth.

8. Brian Tyree Henry in If Beale Street Could Talk - Henry gives the highlight of his banner year in his moving portrayal of essentially memory both those of a loving friendship and a harrowing traumatic experience.

Best Scene: His scene.

7. Alessandro Nivola in Disobedience - Nivola disappears into his role as one of the pillars of a Jewish community and gives a particularly powerful portrayal of a man coming to terms with his beliefs and how they relate to his friendship and his marriage.

Best Scene: "Choose"

6. Linus Roache in Mandy - Roache gives an amazing turn capturing both the hilarity and the horror of a wannabe prophet with severe delusions and pathetic desperation.

Best Scene: Presenting himself.

5. Nicholas Hoult in The Favourite - Hoult once again is given a meaty role and once again makes the most of it in his masterful portrayal of a vicious wit and ambition.

Best Scene: Abigail's Offer.

4. Russell Crowe in Boy Erased - Crowe gives one of his best performances in his nuanced portrayal of a father failing then slowly learning to understand his homosexual son.

Best Scene: Ford Dealership.

3. Tom Waits in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs - Waits delivers a wonderful one man show that creates such an empathetic journey in one man's search for gold.

Best Scene: "You Didn't Hit Nothin' Important"

2. Steven Yeun in Burning - Yeun gives a masterful portrayal of an egotistical detachment that creates a most unnerving sort of possible evil.

Best Scene: Burning Greenhouses.

1. Jeff Bridges in Bad Times At the El Royale - Good prediction Michael McCarthy, and AnonymousBridges takes the top spot overall for me as he delivers one of his best performances. This is giving a thoroughly engaging turn in giving so much life to every facet of his character from the various levels of the facade he puts on, the camaraderie he finds, and most of all his absolutely heartbreaking depiction of a man with dementia.

Best Scene: Describing his memory loss.

Overall Ranking:

Jeff Bridges in Bad Times At the El Royale

Steven Yeun in Burning
Tom Waits in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Richard E. Grant in Can You Ever Forgive Me?
Lewis Pullman in Bad Times At the El Royale
Russell Crowe in Boy Erased
Tim Blake Nelson in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Nicholas Hoult in The Favourite
Linus Roache in Mandy
Lily Franky in Shoplifters
Bill Heck in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs - 4.5
Alessandro Nivola in Disobedience
Jonathan Pryce in The Man Who Killed Don Quixote
Harry Melling in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Jonjo O'Neill in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Grainger Hines in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Brian Tyree Henry in If Beale Street Could Talk
Peter Bogdonavich in The Other Side of the Wind
Daniel Kaluuya in Widows
Chris Hemsworth in Avengers: Infinity War
Robert Forster in What They Had
Anton Yelchin in Thoroughbreds
Russell Hornsby in The Hate You Give
Josh Brolin in Avenges: Infinity War
Michael B. Jordan in Black Panther
Jesse Plemons in Game Night - 4
Mark Rylance in Ready Player One
Riz Ahmed in The Sisters Brothers
Kairi Jō in Shoplifters
Sam Elliott in A Star is Born
Dolph Lundgren in Creed II
Florian Munteanu in Creed II
Josh Brolin in Deadpool 2
Josh Hamilton in Eighth Grade
James Smith in The Favourite
Brian Tyree Henry in Widows
Gabriel Byrne in Hereditary
Liev Schreiber in Isle of Dogs
Sylvester Stallone in Creed II
Tom Waits in The Old Man and the Gun
Sean Harris in Mission Impossible: Fallout
Armie Hammer in Sorry to Bother You
Wyatt Russell in Overlord
Cameron Mitchell in The Other Side of the Wind
Richard Brake in Mandy
Topher Grace in Blackkklansman
Dave Bautista in Hotel Artemis
Ron Livingston in Tully
Ben Whishaw in Mary Poppins Returns
Robert Downey Jr. in Avengers: Infinity War
Adam Driver in Blackkklansman
Jake Johnson in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
Christian Slater in The Wife
Matthew McConaughey in White Boy Rick
Ed Helms in Chappaquiddick
Benedict Cumberbatch in Avengers: Infinity War
Harry Belafonte in Blackkklansman
Paul Bettany in Avengers: Infinity War
Joel Edgerton in Boy Erased - 3.5
Sebastian Stan in Destroyer
Jake Gyllenhaal in Wild Life
Tom Holland in Avengers: Infinity War
Kyle Chandler in Game Night
Joe Alwyn in The Favourite
Sterling K. Brown in Black Panther
Mads Mikkelsen in At Eternity's Gate
Bruno Ganz in The House That Jack Built
Jon Hamm in Bad Times At the El Royale
Steve Buscemi in Nancy
Edoardo Pesce in Dogman
Masaharu Fukuyama in Mirai
Michael Shannon in What They Had
Bradley Cooper in Avengers: Infinity War
Bruce Dern in Chappaquiddick
F. Murray Abraham in Isle of Dogs
Lin Manuel Miranda in Mary Poppins Returns
Henry Cavill in Mission Impossible: Fallout
Julian Dennison in Deadpool 2
Brendan Gleeson in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Norman Foster in The Other Side of the Wind
Edward Norton in Isle of Dogs
Jeff Goldblum in Isle of Dogs
Bill Murray in Isle of Dogs
Bob Balaban in Isle of Dogs
Chelcie Ross in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Tom Vaughan-Lawlor in Avengers: Infinity War
Andrew Dice Clay in A Star is Born
Jude Law in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
Cedric the Entertainer in First Reformed
Anthony Welsh in Journeyman
Jason Clarke in First Man
Brian Tyree Henry in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
Ben Mendelsohn in Ready Player One
Bill Camp in Wild Life
Jasper Paakkonen in Blackkklansman
Paul Stewart in The Other Side of the Wind
Stephen Root in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Colin Farrell in Widows
Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins Returns
Corey Hawkins in Blackkklansman
Stephen Dillane in The Outlaw King
Nicolas Cage in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
James Franco in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Steven Yeun in Sorry to Bother You
Simon Pegg in Mission Impossible: Fallout
Rob Delaney in Deadpool 2
Gregory Sierra in The Other Side of the Wind
Ned Dennehy in Mandy
Saul Rubinek in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Noah Jupe in A Quiet Place
Paul Sparks in Thoroughbreds
Joe Alwyn in Boy Erased
Willie Watson in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Mark Ruffalo in Avenges: Infinity War
Rupert Friend in At Eternity's Gate
T.J. Miller in Deadpool 2
Aaron Taylor-Johnson in Outlaw King
Colman Domingo in If Beale Street Could Talk
Flea in Boy Erased
Michael Beach in If Beale Street Could Talk
Trevante Rhodes in Bird Box
Michael Douglas in Ant-Man and the Wasp
J.K. Simmons in The Front Runner
Jeff Goldblum in Hotel Artemis
Bill Duke in Mandy - 3
Rory Cochrane in White Boy Rick
Jeffrey Donovan in Sicario: Day of the Soldado
Tom Hiddleston in Avengers: Infinity War
Ving Rhames in Mission Impossible: Fallout
Tamuera Morrison in Aquaman
Blake Jenner in American Animals
John Leguizamo in Nancy
Chris Evans in Avengers: Infinity War
Roland Møller in Papillon
Corey Stoll in First Man
Winston Duke in Black Panther
Benedict Wong in Avengers: Infinity War
Dave Chappelle in A Star is Born
Liev Schreiber in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
Kevin J. O'Connor in Widows
Tom Hollander in A Private War
Dave Bautista in Avengers: Infinity War
Ted Danson in Hearts Beat Loud
Steve Buscemi in Lean on Pete
Alfred Molina in The Front Runner
Edmond O'Brien in The Other Side of the Wind
Lamorne Morris in Game Night
Udo Kier in American Animals
John Magaro in Overlord
Johnny Depp in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
John Mulaney in Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
Steve Zahn in Lean on Pete
Tom Hollander in Bird Box
Ryan Eggold in Blackkklansman
Pedro Pascal in If Beale Street Could Talk
Mahershala Ali Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse
Allan Corduner in Disobedience
Lukas Haas in Widows
Danny Glover in Sorry to Bother You
Pilou Asbaek in Overlord
Brad Bird in Incredibles 2
Liam Neeson in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Travis Fimmel in Lean on Pete
Sebastian Koch in Never Look Away
Chris Hemsworth in Bad Times At the El Royale
Tom Hollander in Bohemian Rhapsody
Alec Baldwin in Mission Impossible: Fallout
Harvey Keitel in Isle of Dogs
Paul Walter Hauser in Blackkklansman
Liam Neeson in Widows
Sebastian Stan in Avengers: Infinity War
Jamie Dornan in A Private War
David Krumholtz in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Mark Gatiss in The Favourite
Woody Harrelson in Solo
John Malkovich in Bird Box
Wood Harris in Creed II
Yorick van Wageningen in Papillon
Clancy Brown in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
Algee Smith in The Hate U Give
Chadwick Boseman in Avengers: Infinity War
Russell Hornsby in Creed II
Jon Øigarden in 22 July
Bruce Dern in White Boy Rick
Xavier Dolan in Boy Erased
Garrett Dillahunt in Widows
Alec Baldwin in Blackkklansman
Brian Tyree Henry in White Boy Rick
Billy Howle in Outlaw King
Joseph Mazzello in Bohemian Rhapsody
Stellan Skarsgard in The Man Who Killed Don Quixote
Sam Rockwell in Vice
David Kross in Sorry to Bother You
Kyle Chandler in First Man
James LeGros in Support the Girls
Danny Glover in The Old Man and the Gun
Gwilym Lee in Bohemian Rhapsody
Terry Crews in Sorry to Bother You
Forrest Whittaker in Black Panther
Billy Magnussen in Game Night
Walton Goggins in Ant-Man and the Wasp
Tyler Perry in Vice
Courtney B. Vance in Ben is Back
Patton Oswalt in Sorry to Bother You
Wayne Knight in Blindspotting
Colin Firth in Mary Poppins Returns
Mandy Patinkin in Life Itself
Laurence Fishburne in Ant-Man and the Wasp
Jonah Hill in Don't Worry He Won't Get Far On Foot
Bob Odenkirk in Incredibles 2
Ben Kingsley in Operation Finale
Don Cheadle in Avengers: Infinity War
Donald Glover in Solo
Clancy Brown in Chappaquiddick
Jack Lowden in Mary Queen of Scots
John Cena in Bumblebee
Stacy Keach in Gotti
Benedict Wong in Annihilation - 2.5
Robert Duvall in Widows
Willem Dafoe in Aquaman
Will Patton in Halloween
Jude Law in Vox Lux
Joe Alwyn in Mary Queen of Scots
Nick Kroll in Operation Finale
Timothy Hutton in Beautiful Boy
Gen Hoshino in Mirai
Anthony Mackie in Avengers: Infinity War
Jake Gyllenhaal in The Sisters Brothers
Henry Golding in A Simple Favor
Dan Fogler in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
Yahya Abdul-Manteen II in Aquaman
Jim Gaffigan in Chappaquiddick
Jack Black in Don't Worry He Won't Get Far On Foot
Stanley Tucci in A Private War
Xavier Dolan in Bad Times At The El Royale
Ben Falcone in Can You Ever Forgive Me?
Bob Random in The Other Side of the Wind
Daniel Kaluuya in Black Panther
Ezra Miller in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
Mark Duplass in Tully
Jared Abrahamson in American Animals
Common in The Hate U Give
John Ortiz in Bumblebee
Ben Hardy in Bohemian Rhapsody
Paul Bettany in Solo
Dimitar Marinov in Green Book
Andy Serkis in Black Panther
Chris Pratt in Avengers: Infinity War
Patrick Wilson in Aquaman
Oscar Issac in At Eternity's Gate
Martin Freeman in Black Panther
Rufus Jones in Stan & Ollie
Dolph Lundgren in Aquaman
Dave Franco in If Beale Street Could Talk
Anthony Mackie in The Hate You Give
Manuel Garcia-Rulfo in Sicario: Day of the Soldado
Mamoudou Athie in The Front Runner
Aidan Gillen in Bohemian Rhapsody
K.J. Apa in The Hate U Give
Antonio Banderas in Life Itself
Jorge Lendeborg Jr. in Bumblebee
Danny Huston in Stan & Ollie - 2
James Cromwell in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
Joe Alwyn in Operation Finale
Riz Ahmed in Venom
Steve Carell in Vice
Ted Levine in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
Guy Pearce in Mary Queen of Scots
Jimmy O. Yang in Crazy Rich Asians
David Gyasi in Annihilation
Toby Jones in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom
Michael Pena in Ant-Man and the Wasp
Justin Theroux in Mute
Ken Jeong in Crazy Rich Asians - 1.5
Jefferson Hall in Halloween
Alex Monner in Life Itself
Allen Leech in Bohemian Rhapsody
Haluk Bilginer in Halloween
Benedict Hardie in Upgrade
Rafi Gavron in A Star is Born
Harrison Gilbertson in Upgrade
David Tennant in Mary Queen of Scots
Charlie Day in Hotel Artemis
Max Irons in The Wife
Oscar Isaac in Life Itself
Harry Lloyd in The Wife
Oscar Isaac in Annihilation
Shea Whigham in Vice - 1
Spencer LoFranco in Gotti
Jesse Plemons in Vice
Mike Myers in Bohemian Rhapsody
Justice Smith in Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom
Toby Kebbell in Destroyer
Rafe Spall in Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom

Next: 2018 Lead

Monday, 11 February 2019

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2018: Russell Hornsby in The Hate U Give

Russell Hornsby did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated and winning a few critic awards, for portraying Maverick 'Mav' Carter in The Hate U Give.

The Hate U Give follows a teenage girl, Starr (Amanda Stenberg)'s, struggle after witnessing the death of her best friend by a the hands of a police officer. The film certainly has many more than decent elements however struggles a bit by funneling all of these through YA trappings.

Russell Hornsby, who made a fine impression a couple years ago as Denzel Washington's much older son in Fences, plays Mav Carter the father to Stenberg's Starr. A role similar in intention to Laurence Fishburne's Furious Styles in Boyz n the Hood. A man who has made mistakes in his past and intends to make sure his family survives and thrives. This is made abundantly clear through the film's striking opening scene where Mav outlines how to handle when being pulled over by the police. Hornsby's in turn makes quite the impression in this scene delivery through this monologue with a strict intensity. He creates the right sense of the danger of it through his hollow method, though shows within it the sort of conviction with his work to support the sense that all for the good of children. Hornsby lays it down bluntly with all the seriousness of a man preparing them to survive most of all, and doesn't even make a glint of anything else. Within this also there is this sort of inherent harshness he brings within his presence that effectively suggests a man who has had his own hard life, and that this too is part of this point blank conditioning. Hornsby in his eyes captures this certain weight of a difficult life as he explains this, making quite the powerful first impression in the film.

Hornsby naturally reduces that overt intensity in his next scene, though it is always something inherent in his performance, effectively so. This is as he manages to convey the loving father who tries to give his children a blunt truth for their lives. Hornsby brings this warmth just as this rather subdued yet potent quality in the character. Hornsby almost makes this the exceptions in a sense as these moments of ease when he can find them to show his affection for his children openly. Hornsby finds the right balance in this and does a particularly good job of in finding just brief subtle moments when watching his children this sense of an unconditional love. This is always intertwined with the harshness of the man's past and how that has influenced Mav's present view. Hornsby again though portrays well the way this informs a certain adamant passion in the character. This is as we see it as he explains his views of the drugs being pushed into the neighborhood by outside forces where Hornsby's delivery accentuates this as another blunt truth to Mav who wishes to instill an understanding to this perspective in his children. These moments could fall into posturing, but Horsnby really ground it well through his performance which always makes it this expression of this internalized experience of the man.

After the inciting incident occurs Hornsby's is perhaps too much of a secondary character much of the time. Every moment he appears though is a strong one due to his devoted work. One of the best moments being when he comforts his daughter from a nightmare after the shooting. Hornsby's great in the scene as he plays it more like a soldier comforting a fellow comrade with PTSD than just a concerned father. He importantly doesn't overplay this though again making it rational by making the state of Mav such a vivid one. This is not shown to be always a positive thing as we see him fight with his wife (Regina Hall), and shows his own limits of tolerance when Starr brings home a white boyfriend. The former scenes Hornsby brings the right determination again within the spirit of the character that he attaches to a conviction to protect his home, much as he protects his family, that he shows to be stubborn though based within an earnest belief. The latter Hornsby is great in as it could've been a moment that easily devolved to some over the top act. Thankfully Hornsby realizes this so well as he portrays not so much a disappointment in his daughter, but rather in himself in his expression of the scene as one of self-loathing surrounding the mistakes of his past. I wish the film had focused more on his character as his scenes are the best in the film. The film gets unfortunately a little muddled in its portrayal of the conflict between the family and an old drug dealer acquaintance of Mav's where that YA influence becomes evident. This in that the drug dealer, despite being played by the reliable Anthony Mackie, feels more like a YA villain than a realistic menace. This simplifies the interactions of the conflict and unfortunately makes most of Hornsby's late scenes pretty limited in scope and potential for him. Now he's still very good in every moment he does have and brings as much of a reality and weight to even the more contrived moments. This is especially in the scene of the "giving hate" speech, that while it seems more reminiscent of something more like a speech from the Hunger Games, than something from Boyz N the Hood, in its approach. Hornsby's though is so very genuine in his switch from an intense hate to an adamant love that he does make up for that to an extent. Hornsby's consistently grants an honesty to these moments even as the narrative becomes a little unwieldy in its overarching tone. His performance though is a consistently potent element in the film that is frankly of a greater film than the one he appears in.

Sunday, 10 February 2019

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2018: Jeff Bridges and Lewis Pullman in Bad Times At the El Royale

Jeff Bridges did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Father Daniel Flynn or is it Daniel "Dock" O'Kelly nor did Lewis Pullman for portraying Miles Miller in Bad Times At The El Royale.

Bad Times At The El Royale is a very entertaining film about a group of strangers at a rundown glamor hotel in the 1960's. Thankfully for all it isn't in reality set in the mind of man child serial killer with multiple personalities(I wish I was making up that plot point for a different film with a similar setup).

Full fledged acting veteran now, Jeff Bridges plays one of these strangers who is one of the first we are introduced to. We meet him alongside Darlene Sweet (Cynthia Erivo), whose only secret is that she's an underappreciated singer. Bridges initially appearing effectively giving us two sides of his character upon the outset. The first as he is introduced to sweet to which there is a harder look in his eyes, and a more reserved demeanor. Upon her introducing herself and recognizing his "priesthood" Bridges takes upon a much brighter disposition fitting to a priest. Bridges brings an unassuming jovial quality once this happens bringing a believable enough bright smile to his face, and eager demeanor to deflect any real interest in what he's doing beyond being a priest. Of course this is just a primer in a sense of Bridges's brilliant approach to the part from the outset that plants the seeds of the true nature of his character, well properly putting on the show of the man most would probably be convinced by. Although one can easily overlook such things initially just to be yourself taken away by very charismatic turn from Bridges, which is always a delightful thing. Bridges properly regulates though as bringing his typically endearing presence though wrapping it within the context supposedly of a priest just there to travel while living to spread the word of God.

Lewis Pullman, the son of Bill Pullman which is quite evident in his shared demeanor and voice of his old man, on the other hand is not one of the arriving strangers, but the single employee of the hotel. This is as he appears from the dark den of the maintenance closet. Pullman essentially plays the part that would be taken on by Elisha Cook Jr. in the 40's or perhaps Steve Buscemi in the 90's, that as the seemingly rather pathetic concierge who is a personification of the lost of its glory days. This is right within Pullman's performance which evokes those sort of turns, though without imitation, quite effectively in his portrayal of Miles. From the outset Pullman just exudes desperation right from his initial reaction as though even meeting the new guests is some painful exercise in holding it just long enough to do his job of presenting the hotel. The hotel presentation being a horribly purposefully poor presentation on Pullman's part, showing just the strain through every put upon smile, and just the weakness of his delivery as he attempts, and fails horribly to put a little zest in his delivery. It is perhaps the weakest of all the facades within the film as it is obvious that Miles is terrible at his job, but it goes even deeper than that. This in this 1000 yard stare that Pullman brilliantly portrays as his resting expression when not forcing himself some sort of front, immediately suggesting some terrible past before we learn a single thing about the man.

The film then becomes a clashing of secrets of many different sorts. Bridges's for one being the right texture to his work as a man with a secret, worse than some, better than others, and in turn expresses that in his work of portraying just the right sense of it even in the waiting scene. He brings in just small little glances nearly the face of another man with some weight and anxiety as he spins a coin to determine his room. Now quickly the secrets force the revelations of one another, one of the first being that each room is fitted with recording equipment including one way mirrors. This revealing one secret of Bridges's "father" looking for something beneath the floor boards with some desperation, meanwhile no one way mirror is needed to see Pullman's Miller in a state of unconsciousness as he writhes in heroine use. Soon afterwards though we see Bridges putting on the kindly act again as he invites Darlene for a meal within hotel. As now there is a bit of a task at hand, Bridges finds just the right approach in leaning as this jovial priest sort. It's a reasonably believable approach however Bridges's delivery is occasionally just a little too outgoing. This is not in a way that would alarm most, but just enough that it would alarm someone who is a little more seasoned with dealing with BS artists as Darlene is.

There is a brief moment though between Darlene and the priest where the facade completely disappears, though not to that harder look, but rather something else as the priest attempts to explain that he seems to be losing his mind and frequently loses time. Bridges is downright amazing in this moment as he captures instantly this very real unease in the man as even the explanation seems to aspire this palatable fear.. There is such a moving vulnerability in this moment that Bridges express so powerfully suggesting that even if so much else of the man may not be true, what he is speaking in this moment is unquestionably so. It is frankly one of the best acted moments of the career as there is only the most honest poignancy in his performance as he manages in the moment to show the pathos of a man facing death but wrapped with the disjointed confusion brought upon the specific disease that has befallen him. This heart to heart is cut short when the priest reveals himself to be anything but when he tries to drug Darlene, and Darlene reveals herself to be more than capable by slamming a bottle of champagne in his face. This briefly makes the switches in this review a tad easier as Miles is the one to help the priest from his injury.

Upon awakening we see again the gruffer man in Bridge's physical work that emphasizes how the real man here would react in an unknown situation. This with an internalized intensity with again this hard eyes and pointed delivery that evokes even a menace as he interrogates Miles on where he is. When he is reminded Bridges is fantastic in the moment of suddenly refashioning the facade, though almost as this halfway thing, which is enough given Miles's state. Miles's state being that he must confess his sins to a priest with perhaps as much of a need as Kichijiro's in Silence. Pullman is also great in this moment as he goes from the mild concierge to expelling this desperate need in his quietly earnest delivery of asking the father to hear his sins. Pullman is terrific in this moment by showing again that stare in his eyes as though he is looking upon those sins as he asks the priest, showing this preoccupation of thought making it believable that he in no way would pick up on the cracks Bridges reveals in the "father's" facade. Pullman expression so well internalizes this need that is just on the cusp of becoming unbearable for him, before this is silence by further inquiries about the hotel by the "priest". This being a careful scene where Bridges shows some subtle manipulations as he allows for the priestly misconception to manipulate the young man, while showing that harder of eye of a man trying to find a way to his prize.

Unfortunately for poor Miles this is disrupted when he gets, through the peeping Tom mirrors, some accidental buck shot via another guest Emily (Dakota Johnson) due to her attempt to protect her sister Rose (Cailee Spaeny), from an interfering FBI agent and the cult Emily's trying to steal her sister from. While Miles faces that though we return to the father who we in fact learn is a career bank robber named Dock O'Kelly who is trying to find an old stash of cash that was left by his brother, who was killed by a treacherous third man in their old heist crew. Bridges again is so on point in terms of giving us this other side again to his character. As even in the brief scene of the heist he accentuates the professional man during the event in his direct delivery of the frustration towards the eventual treacherous man hurting people during the robbery. We then see him in brief series of flashbacks in his time in jail for the robbery where again Bridges is quite harrowing in showing the man lost in his mind. Bridges doesn't simplify these moments but makes them truly remarkable by portraying them so genuinely. He delivers them with the right blunt distress as the Dock finds himself lost in his thoughts within jail, and is so very moving in his subtle reaction as he is told of his diagnosis of dementia. In Bridges's hands this is not just a simple plot point to enforce substance, but brings such reality to it that makes such a notable impact due to power of his performance.

Things go less well for Miles as Emily considers his fate for witnessing her murder someone, to which his defense is he's seen all sorts of terrible things at the hotel. Pullman is amazing in this scene as he outlines the horror of his job for the past few years. Pullman grants such vividness to every detail through his reactions that evoke such misery and is especially haunting as his delivery suggests how these tales weigh upon his soul. Pullman though is also so good in just granting a necessary desperation in his plea as he so effectively portrays Miles stating his reasons for being let live in addition to them being intertwined as part of the sins that trouble him so deeply. One of the reasons though being that he knows so little about the women, which Rose purposefully screws up in her demented way by giving info on both of them. Pullman's reaction to this is incredibly moving as his face takes upon such a sad resignation of his fate, which likely be death. Dock on the other hand seeks negotiations of a different sort with Darlene as he comes clean to the point of offering her half of the money he believes he buried under her room. It is here we get more of Erivo and Bridges in their interactions, which built off their initial ones to create a wonderful chemistry between the two of them. Both actors just find the right gradual warmth in this sense of understanding, that isn't focused upon too long plot wise, yet the actors in their way of speaking and physically interacting, manage to convey a believable friendship of sorts that develops between the two of them.

All of these plot threads come to a head when the cult arrives led by Billy Lee (Chris Hemsworth) who brings everyone together to attempt to decide their fate. Bridges is excellent here as well in portraying the complete disregard for Lee in every unimpressed glance and disrespecting delivery towards him. He also within this has some wonderful moments Erivo in their momentary trades that again bring a real warmth even within the intense situation, as they earn the gradual connection the two slowly find during their mutual present existence. Pullman on the other hand is great by being a complete wreck the entire time as he shows the man nearly ready to scream out his heart, and then naturally does so when it appears he may be killed, through a game of life or death roulette put on by Billy. Pullman is fantastic in showing in the moment as a hysterical purge as he looks to Dock for benediction as he still believes him to be a priest. Bridges in turn is fantastic in his reactions that capture a certain embarrassment and unease that the man will not be able to find any real solace in him. The one point that Billy knocks Dock off is when he asks him his name. Bridges is down right astonishing in this moment as he is able to convey the way Dock is honestly trying to recall the name, and creates such a real sense of the anguish at being able to do so. He then is equally powerful in the tenderness he brings within his confusion as Bridges delivers the line so quietly as Dock as Darlene if he ever told him his real name. Bridges again never simplifies the state of Dock's disease, but rather so consistently reveals the tragedy of it.

Fed up nonetheless with Billy's games, Dock tries to physically overpower him leaving it up to Miles to save the day when he has a handgun in reach. Pullman again is great in revealing Miles's own anxieties as he looks upon the gun and that stare again shows up as he timidly admits to killing over a hundred people. Through flashback, and when Miles gains the courage in the present, Pullman is simply marvelous in portraying Miles the soldier. In the moment Pullman shows the man entirely in his element as he kills all the cultists with this strict precision which Pullman portrays with this eloquent form of a well oiled machine. Nonetheless the crazy Rose stabs Miles leaving him for dead, and one final chance to repent for his sins. Bridges and Pullman are both outstanding in this moment. This is with Pullman finally releasing his sins though now with a sense of comfort that he portrays as the young man losing that desperation in his stare, and with Bridges showing Dock put on his priest facade one more time. This time different though as Bridges shows the respectful earnestness within every word reflecting a man who truly does want to comfort this man in his time of need. The two are heartbreaking together as Pullman portrays this moment of loving release, against Bridges who is able to portray both the facade as pure thing now along within his eyes accentuating Dock understanding that performing this lie is the right thing to do and through his impassioned delivery of each word of forgiveness. Bridges, Pullman as well as Erivo, are each essential to the film as the heightened writing could've easily led to too much exaggeration. I love the work of all three though as each find a real humanity and weight within the scenario to deliver such remarkable portraits that go beyond mere archetypes. This is truly a magnificent break through performance by the young Pullman, and for Bridges it is one of the greatest achievements of his storied career.