Showing posts with label Stephen Daldry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stephen Daldry. Show all posts

Friday, 12 November 2010

I was up early in the morning a few days ago and The Reader was on, I tuned in at that specific scene where Hana and Michael are in the bedroom. Though, in all honesty they do spend half their time there, but I digress. It’s Michael’s birthday and he’s annoyed that Hana doesn’t even seem interested. “You looking for a fight kid?” No, I didn’t get some massive epiphany about how this scene was some sort of metaphor for the general reaction to The Reader back in 2008, and its eventual Oscar glory. It’s even less a summation of the gravity of the film, but watching it – yes, I did end up watching the entire thing from there – I wondered why The Reader is called a pretentious Holocaust flick. Your guess is as good as mine to whether or not it’s pretentious, but Holocaust? That seems like a stretch. I saw The Reader for the first time back in 2008 the same day that I saw Revolutionary Road which culminated in a one-two punch of complete depression. I liked them both, and I’ve seen the latter countless times even if it’s not the easiest film to sit through but for some reason I haven’t seen The Reader since. It’s odd, I bought the DVD – I still have it, but I’ve never watched it. It’s not meant to be a slight to the film, because it still is as good as I thought it was – better even, but I’m not sure what it was that stopped me from seeing it again.
 What struck me most upon rewatching it was how quickly the first act goes. It’s the most generic portion of the film, but it also seems in many ways to be the strongest. I’m a big fan of Ralph Fiennes but he’s not as essential to the film’s plot as the poster would have you believe and even Kate who appears in the past and present is not as irreplaceable to the narrative. Sure, she gives the strongest performance but it’s up to David Kross as young Michael to ensure that first half (and more) of The Reader. I’ve gleaned from IMDB that he has a number of upcoming projects and his performance here ranks among my favourites of 08 even if he was virtually ignored. What I appreciate most about the narrative is its slowness to cast judgement on either Hana or Michael. Depending on who you speak to, both of them are being morally reprehensible – and I’m not talking about the court case in the middle of the film. The thing is, I could care less about the legality of their affair and Daldry and Hare manage to make it work, romantic even. It’s an odd partnership but it really is brilliant watching Kross and Winslet together.
It seems unfair that somewhere along the line The Reader is given the moniker of “holocaust film”, anyone who leaves the film with the trial in the middle as the most significant plot point doesn’t seem like someone who paid keen attention to it. True, the trial is an important arc and that potential dissonance that occurs when considering whether or not Hana should be guilty so many years after the fact is probably the point – but the point of the film is more than just that. Calling it a character study isn’t a copout – that’s the bare essentials of what it’s about really. Stephen Daldry is lucky to have such a successful streak, Oscar-wise, but he’s even more lucky to have directed three successful films each of which is starkly different from the others. True, The Reader doesn’t resonate as much as The Hours or Billy Elliot but I still say it’s one well worth watching.
            
Where do you stand on The Reader?

Friday, 18 June 2010

This is how I shall be spending the next week beginning tomorrow, but sans Kate Winslet. Yes, my exams are underway from Monday. The meme will go on (automated posting) and I do have a special event planned for Sunday (not sure if I'll actually be online on Sunday though) and then there was another event a number of you know of,  but that will have to be pushed back to the next Monday (sorry)...but enough about me...what are you doing for the weekend? Any movie plans?

Sunday, 14 March 2010

By now you’ve probably heard me mention internal acting quite often. Sometimes it doesn’t work, but you’d have realises I tend to get all hot and bothered when an actor shows talent in keeping their emotions at bay but still relaying their feelings to the audience. Mirren in Gosford Park and Whishaw in Bright Star were noticeable for this trait as was this particularly exceptional performance.
        
#7 Julianne Moore in The Hours (2002)
 Julianne stars as Laura Brown, the protagonist of the middle story of The Hours. While Virginia writes about Mrs. Dalloway and Clarissa lives it Laura reads about the women. It’s a symbolic action because Laura Brown is a spectator who yearns to be on the inside. Still, it would be a disservice to The Hours and to Julianne to call her the clichéd dissatisfied housewife of the era. We catch only a day in the life of Laura and in many ways it’s not as obvious a pivotal day as Clarissa and Virginia but Julianne convinces us. From the very first shot of Julianne I know something is off about Laura. Look into those eyes and they’re completely empty. It’s an emptiness that becomes more pronounced as the day goes on.
It would seem that Laura is the least sympathetic of the three, but I never can judge them against each other, and she's not bad just misunderstood. I always see her as a woman more worthy of our pity that hate. It’s like the story of the mother in Lawrence’s “The Rocking Horse Winner”. We can palpably notice Julianne’s attempt at loving her child. The kisses, terms of endearment but there are those moments (blink and you’ll miss them) where her discomfort is obvious and unnerving. It’s there in her enunciation too. It’s as if she’s speaking as slowly as possible to buy time, she’s not sure how to communicate with this person. I spoke about Clarissa’s defining moment with her visitor and Laura has hers too – Kitty. Next to Kitty’s almost violently bubbly behaviour (a superficial one) Laura seems even more dour. I like the moment, for example, when Kitty inquires as to the plot of Laura’s novel. I love Laura’s response “It’s about this woman...well, she's a hostess, and she's incredibly confident, everyone thinks she's fine - bu she isn't." It’s such a strange summation of the novel and Julianne’s intonation always chills me, even though I’m not sure why.
Julianne is forced to act in vignettes because Laura really is the least defined of the three women, she is more of a plot point than a character on her own. So Julianne must act with her eyes. For example, the tortured look of conflict as she leaves Richie at the babysitter. She already knows what she plans to do, and a favourite moment of mine is when she decides (or is Virginia who decides…) that suicide is not the option. The gasp and the teary eyes are terrifying and a complete conveyance of emotion even though, really, we haven’t been given that much information. The ending of her portion as she cries in the bathroom is always a punch in the gut and though I’ve not quite understood Laura – as yet – I still feel profound sympathy for her.
…Of course, she returns. She is the only woman to exist in more than one chapter, and she nails it. Her line to Meryl “It was death, I chose life” is one in many excellent line readings in the film and as she accepts her life – and her son’s lack thereof – I always applaud Julianne for crafting brilliance where few could have succeeded as well.
           
This remains as the peak of my appreciation of Julianne and I will continue to praise her subtlety here. But what do you think of her Laura Brown?

Sunday, 13 December 2009

Billy Elliot

Stephen Daldry is lucky. He’s earned three Oscar nominations for each of his three films. I don’t think anyone has ever gone three for three in terms of direction; so regardless of your thoughts on The Reader, The Hours or Billy Elliot [The Dancer] the man has to have some modicum of talent.
              
Billy Elliot is the lightest of Daldry’s films but that doesn’t make it any less good than the others. I suppose the emotional weight of the story may have been lost with the recent commercialism of its Broadway adaptation, but Billy Elliot is nice little film that somehow managed to earn a few Oscar nominations for itself. It tells the story of the eponymous Billy who becomes a ballet dancer despite the obvious obstacles to this goal. Like so many films of its type, it’s not the actual story per se that makes Billy Elliot original. It’s the treatment of the story and the good dialogue and acting that make it something of a treasure.

2000 was a good film year. Coming off the embarrassment of riches that was 1999 [a tough act to follow], it had some impressive pieces. Gladiator may not have been my favourite, but it was triumph, say what you wish about Soderbergh but that one two punch of Traffic and Erin Brockovich was enviable. Chocolat knew its audience, if nothing else. And that’s not even getting into the game changers like Dancer in the Dark, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Almost Famous and underrated gems like Before Night Falls and Quills. Still Billy Elliot, not necessarily the best of the lot, was the one with the most heart.
                  
I always marvel at Julie Walter’s nomination. Along with Marcia Gay Harden it’s anyone’s bet what had Oscar giving them nominations. But I am glad that they did because like Gay Harden ,Julie Walters is quite effective in Billy Elliot. A throwaway role? Probably. But not any less good because of it. I can’t offer up an unbiased view of 2000’s actor line-up but it’s a pity that Jamie Bell couldn’t get an Oscar nomination, although I suppose that would be asking too much.
              
Billy Elliot is #94 on my list of favourites. Though I’ve never been disappointed with either of Daldry’s subsequent efforts I’d like to see him tackle a comedy again.
               
Were you a fan of Billy Elliot? Or do you prefer Daldry's later efforts?

Thursday, 4 June 2009

#30 The Hours

The Hours is #30 in my list of favourite movies… of course the more accurate title would be Films I’d Watch Over and Over again. The first time I saw this movie was sometime back in 2003 on A&E and I can’t forget thinking how bleak it was, but not in a bad way. There are a lot of things I like about this movie, but what I like the most is the acting. Every actor in the movie give outstanding performances making me think it was the best ensemble of 2002. It’s hard, and unfair, to judge the performances against each other but the standout performance for me in many ways was Meryl Streep’s Clarissa Vaughn. The Academy love her so much and yet they couldn’t nominate for this. This is arguably my favourite Streep performance, it may not be as good as others, but it’s still pretty damn good. Her Clarissa is the most sympathetic protagonist of the three part story and she has some really strong scenes especially those with another big star – Ed Harris. I am still pissed that Harris did not win the Oscar he deserved for Best Supporting Actor that year, it was way better than that other actor. Claire Danes, Jeff Bridges and Alison Janey who are also participants in Clarissa’s arc also play important roles and give strong performances.



If Streep plays the most sympathetic I guess that ostensibly Julianne Moore plays the least sympathetic, but that’s such a cop out in terms of judging her performance. Julianne Moore is really, really, really a good actress. Of all the actors in The Hours she achieves the most with the least. Just looking at her eyes we see so much more, which prevents her Laura from become a caricature… and that voice. It’s just freakin’ wonderful. A completely deserving Oscar nomination followed – and don’t you know it sometimes I wish she had won the Oscar even though I was supporting Catherine at the time. She has the most poignant line of the whole movie for me when she says It was death, I chose life. Toni Collette is the only person in this arc that really wows me (other than Julianne), this is my favourite performance of hers, I never saw as this kind of coquettish character, although I suppose coquettish is the wrong word...



Then there is Nicole Kidman’s Virginia Woolf, who invisibly, holds the narrative together. It is her Mrs. Dalloway that Laura is reading… that Clarissa has become. Virginia is really a troubled character, and although I know many people will identify the train scene as there favourite there are two other scenes which show the wonderfulness of Nicole Kidman’s performance. There’s the scene where she is cajoling Nelly into going to London. It’s just so freakishly weird, and uncomfortable as she tries to command her with her eyes and that taunting tone and expression with the cigarette in hand. Then there is the scene with Miranda Richardson, no not kiss. It’s when she tells her, even crazy people like to be asked Nessa. This line, I think, represents the entire point of Virginia’s arc. The problem is not that she is crazy, but at least let others treat her as a person… and oh wasn’t Miranda Richardson outstanding? Don’t you wish Oscars were given for cameos? I almost wish she’d have a movie of this character; she was so effective as the Woolf’s sister. Kudos too to Stephen Dillane who played Leonard, Kidman’s husband.



All the actors in The Hours need to thank David Hare for his wonderful script. The novel seems almost inadaptable, but he is able to make it just wonderful and gives each character so much to do. And let’s not forget Stephen Daldry. Some have criticised his lack of subtlety, but that’s not the point of the movie… or maybe it is, who knows. Still, you can’t really fault him. If they HAD to split the director/picture category in 2002, couldn’t they have given it to him? Or at least give the Oscar to Philip Glass for his amazing score. Anyway, that’s all gone, but this movie remains.

The Hours is a great movie, and I think everyone needs to see it – I suppose it won’t be for everyone, but you won’t know until you see it… so you should see it.

Tuesday, 12 May 2009

I have exams going on right now, but I continue to post on the net or reading Film Experience and The Awards Circuit. Oh well, whatever. Still celebrating the imminent release of Nine I have another list of nine. Nine films I want to see made, I don't have all nine though, just three. Bear with me... My premise is simple these works of fiction need to be made into movies now with top notch actors to win some Oscars.

Anybody Can Do Anything based on a novel by Betty MacDonald

CAST
Directed by Stephen Daldry
Written by
Betty Bard Kirsten Dunst
Mary Bard Emily Blunt
Sidney Bard Annette Bening
Dede Bard Natalie Portman
Allison Bard Scarlet Johansson
Cleve Bard Haley Joel Osment
Gammy Susan Sarandon

This is a sort of autobiography work of fiction. The author Betty struggles to survive during The Great Depression, actually struggle is the wrong word. This novel is a work of comedy. It is hilarious. If you have not read it, go out and get it. NOW!

I have put some serious thought into adapting this (obscure and largely unknown) novel. I even wrote about 30 pages of script for it, but that was a few years back when I thought Nicole Kidman and Renee Zellweger would be great in it. They still could, but they’d be too old –which sucks. I know this isn’t a real movie, but I would have loved to see them in this Depression era comedy. I have always felt that Kirsten Dunst was a much better actress than people give her credit for. She never got the chance to show us. Since her performance in Interview With the Vampire I’ve always felt that she was going to be a great actress – and now more than a decade after the fact there’s nothing. I am a fan of Stephen Daldry. I’ve loved each if his three films – and he can do both comedy and drama exceptionally. This film would be a cross between the two genres. Emily Blunt is good at lightweight comedy, and Mary is the most colourful character in the novel, she has the strongest lines – and is just a little caustic (not like The Devil Wears Prada though…). Annette Bening is good at playing mothers, and the role of Sidney is just the type of easy-but-tough maternal character that could become a strong supporting role on screen. Portman, Johansson and Osment seem like a good trio to round out the rest of the family, and Susan Sarandon as the tough-as-nails grandmother is pretty much a no brainer, although the role in the book is not that big. They could always flesh it out though. I assume that they’ll probably want to change the name of the film though… I don’t know to what. Would this be a big player at the Oscars? Costumes and Art Direction could be forthcoming, and I think music should be an important part of the film. In terms of acting Emily Blunt and possibly Bening would be likely contenders, Dunst would have most of the weight on her though and she could be a contender – the role is a bit like a Depression Era Bridget Jones. The AMPAS loves Stephen Daldry so I guess he would get his fourth consecutive Best Director nod for this…

PS. Everyone of the family members have red hair!


Will Emily Blunt get the Oscar nomination she deserved for Prada?



Crooked House based on a novel by Agatha Christie

CAST
Crooked House directed by Joe Wright
Screenplay – Julian Fellowes
Charles Hayward – Peter Sarasgard
Sophia Leonides – Rosamund Pike
Magda (Sophia's Mum) – Kristin Scott Thomas
Philip (her Father) – Ralph Fiennes
Police Commissioner
Clemeny Leonides (Mrs. Robert Leonides)– Michelle Pfeiffer
Roger Leonides – Daniel Day Lewis - I could not resist
Brenda Leonides – Sally Hawkins
Laurence Brown – James McAvoy
Josephine – Saiorse Ronan
Eustace - Freddy Highmore
Edith de Haviland – Miranda Richardson


I like Agatha Christie but generally I don’t like her movies (except for Murder on the Orient Express). I don’t really like murder mystery films generally, which is why I have such an unabated love for Gosford Park, which focused on the people more than on the murder. I think Crooked House would work as a film, if done in the same vein as Gosford Park. It’s one of the lesser known Christie novels and the plot is simple. It’s immediately after the World War II and the police commissioner’s son – somewhat of a lothario wants to marry this beautiful socialite, but when her grandfather dies – ostensibly murdered she says she won’t be able to marry him unless the murder is solved. The thing is everyone is hoping that his wife – a woman almost forty years his junior did it, because if it is anyone else it could cause a huge scandal. Naturally the cast – list of suspects – is extensive; The murdered man’s children, grandchildren, a tutor who was having an affair with the wife, etc. The cast will be mainly British – as expected. And key roles need to have real heavyweights in them. Edith de Havilland is not a flashy role, but it is the key supporting role and Oscar likes those (Helen Mirren in Gosford Park.
Who knows, this could be a real heavyweight come Oscar season. I predict that it will be a tough year and it gets seven nods. Art Direction, Costume Design, Score, Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography (wins), Supporting Actress (Ronan or Richardson), Director. I predict that Kristin Scott Thomas and Peter Sarasgard give great performances, but are snubbbed by major award bodies.


Miranda knows more about the murder than she lets on... but is she the killer?

Fences based on a play by August Wilson

CAST
Fences directed by Kenny Leon
Screenplay –
Troy – Laurence Fishburne
Rose – Angela Bassett
Gabriel – Don Cheadle
Cory – Mechad Brooks
Jim – Mos Def
Alberta – Taraji P. Henson
Lyons - Keith Robinson

Why aren’t there any black period pieces? Granted, this is not really an actual period piece, but it is to some extent. This play won a Pulitzer Prize and a few Tony’s, I’ve never heard of a revival and I think it needs to be made into a film. Where has Angela Basset been all these years? I mean, she deserves more than having co-lead roles in Tyler Perry films. I know she could act the hell of this tour-de-force role (which won a supporting actress Tony for Mary Alice). It’s actually a leading role, but you know the Tony’s don’t care about category fraud. If this is made into a good film whoever gets this role will get some awards recognition, and then how could I not wax nostalgic and cast Laurence Fishburne as her husband. The role was originally played by James Earl Jones (he won a Tony for it) and Laurence Fishburne does remind me of Jones. This would be spectacular. Then there’s the role of Gabriel, his semi-retarded brother. Don Cheadle is one of my favourite actors period (he was the only thing I liked in Crash) and he is an Oscar nominated actor (he was second only to DiCaprio for his great performance in Hotel Rwanda). I know he can do this. The role of, the son is a big one and there’s no competent young black actor I could see in the role. Mechad Brooks had a few episodes on ABC’s Desperate Housewives as Alfre Woodard’s son and he delivered, I feel he could deliver as Troy. Lyons is Troy's other son, I don't know if Keith Robinson, but I like him. I think he showed some potential in Dreamgirls. I like the idea of a throwback casting for Mos Def as the best friend, if not him then Courtney B. Vance who was in the original Broadway Cast . I like the idea of Taraji as the other woman, just because I like Taraji, the role is unseen in the play – but they could meat it up for the play.
Kenny Leon showed promise and earned a DGA nod for her work in A Raisin in the Sun with Audra McDonald. I'll take a chance on him. Maybe Angela and Laurence could win Oscars. The role of Gabriel is prime Oscar bait.



So will Angie finally get that Oscar?

Which of these movies would you look forward to?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
 

FREE HOT VIDEO | HOT GIRL GALERRY