May 5, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
I just LOVE her. (And I hope she wins, damnit!)
Her quote should be; “How about we give the Best
Actress Oscar this year to the nominee who
actually did the BEST ACTING. Not the best impersonation
of poor white trash, being ugly, or both.” That
NathanielR has struck upon something.
problem is swank isn’t white trash and redneck. thats what makes her acting there so good. open ur eyes, elitists
Elitist? Dude you are as blind as Jordi LaForge back
before he created those nifty ocular implants. She
represents every poor white trash woman wanting
to do good that ever existed. Nothing wrong with
that, but you need to just look at it the way the
movie portrays her.
But I love Hilary Swank in anything. Even in the
Core. That movie sucks, but she rules all.
so u agree with me yet i’m blind? help me out here. people want benning to win cause shes “acting”. like hillary isn’t?
come on now
Personally I am more fond of Swank’s performance than the movie itself.
Benning shows more range and more dimensions in her performance than Swank does. Swank was great but it was just a more limited role. The award should go to the person who gives the best, most complex performance, not to the actress whose character suffers the most or to the actress whose character shows the most “simple goodness” or whatever. Benning makes you actually like a bitchy diva despite yourself, makes her seem both insufferable and charming, wise and yet also sometimes foolish, vain and yet generous, honest at heart and yet capable of diabolical scheming. The character could easily have come off as incoherent, or as some sort of cartoon version of an old Bette Davis role, but Benning makes Julia utterly believable. The film itself is no masterpiece, but the performance is.
Well, as Eddie himself says in the film, Maggie grows up knowing one thing, that she was trash. At the same time, Swank really gives life to the character, and we really see some great range from her as she grows and changes based on both her relationships with Frankie and Eddie, and then of course the other side after the tone shift near the end. And I’m sure that someone will come back and say that this is also ‘cliche,’ the cliche being the apprentice learning from the mentor and vice versa, but I would say: a) that it’s more complex than that, and b) that’s supposed to be the case when we realize what Eddie’s narration actually constitutes.
A limited role? She carried the movie. I may not like her a lot as an actress but she is pretty damn good in this.
All of this is pointless if neither win, they could split the vote and then we’d have another Marissa Torme.
Dude you are as blind as Jordi LaForge back
before he created those nifty ocular implants.
Wow, you just neatly gathered every Internet stereotype into one little sentence. Bravo.
Gombro wrote: “Benning shows more range and more dimensions in her performance than Swank does. Swank was great but it was just a more limited role. The award should go to the person who gives the best, most complex performance, not to the actress whose character suffers the most or to the actress whose character shows the most “simple goodness” or whatever.”
If I had an Academy ballot and had to select one of the two front-runners, Swank would easily get my vote over Bening. That said, if we follow Gombro’s criteria above, Kate Winslet for “Eternal Sunshine” would win in a walk.
You should also remember that Bening is a middle-aged actress playing a middle-aged actress. An awful lot of Academy members, facing increasingly less work because of the obsession with youth, can identify with Julia and exult in her ultimate triumph over the blonde pinhead wannabe. I wouldn’t write Bening off just yet; that character strikes a chord.
now, Jimmy, coincidentally enough, I just caught ten minutes of ETERNAL SUNSHINE today during a presentation, and I was actually struck anew by just how good Winslet is in it. Hummm…. Well, I’m glad I don’t have a ballot cuz it would be a hard choice….
I’m all for Imelda Staunton. There’s no buzz about here anymore. I don’t get it. Her performance as Vera Drake is one of the best performances I’ve ever seen on film.
If there’s a Benning/Swank split, I’d say Staunton will be the beneficiary. I wouldn’t count her out AT ALL.
C, how does Swank grow and change in that movie? She doesn’t seem to have much depth to me. She’s totally ambitious with no hint of ambition’s dark side (i.e. lack of concern for anyone else as you trudge toward the top) and totally generous with others with no hint of generosity’s dark side (i.e. expecting something in return).
I liked her performance. Swank is extremely likeable in the role but I just don’t see any range or depth to the character. How does she change? What is her character arc? What is Swank showing you about the character that isn’t obvious from the plot itself?
She’s getting a LOT of credit for how sympathetic her character’s plight and personality are.
Winslet and Bening (and to a much lesser degree Staunton) all risk rounding out their characters with rough edges… i.e. they feel three dimensional. There’s things you love about them and things you dislike about them but they are “full” characterizations. The characters make sense.
Swank is totally loveable in M$B, I’m not disputing that. But she’s playing an idea rather than a person.
but back to topic. Hilarious quote from Bening!
it would be a huge upset if swank lost. maybe she’ll have to play a retard or a gal with palsy to get over this hatred of her and her down home roles
“She’s totally ambitious with no hint of ambition’s dark side (i.e. lack of concern for anyone else as you trudge toward the top)”
-Maggie costs Frankie a bunch of money when she fails to follow his advice about laying off on going for the early knockouts so that she can get more actual fight experience. In fact, Frankie says that Maggie is the fighter who listened to him the least.
-When Maggie breaks her nose, she makes Frankie ‘fix’ it so that she can go on fighting, despite Frankie’s protestations. And while she might not specifically know what happened with Eddie’s eye before (I don’t remember the order of those scenes), she’s likely at least heard that Frankie is very protective of his fighters and that he would likely be very damaged if one of his boxers got seriously injured.
-While Maggie is the recipient of illegal tactics at first, she has no hesitation in fighting back dirty by doing things such as repeatedly punching the sciatic nerve.
-When Maggie finds out how badly she’s hurt one of the boxers she’s fought, she’s briefly shows concern, but Frankie tells her not to be concerned, and she quickly shrugs it off.
Basically, when the film starts, Maggie is a sad and unsure aging waitress who likely got out of her hometown as quickly as she could and who never really made any connections with her family or what would be called friends. By the middle, she’s happy, confident, even defiant, trying to help her family even when they rebuff her, and learning and teaching her 2 boxing mentors. Those are some pretty big changes in my book, and then, of course, they’re followed by an even bigger shift in character, and when this shift occurs, she has to ask Frankie to do something that she must know will likely destroy him on some level.
Thanks for the spoilers C. Real nice. I didn’t know I was coming to Ain’t it Cool. Please show respect everyone and not post spoilers to films that have just been released.
Huh? This is the film’s 9th week of release, and the start of the 3rd weekend of wide release. I apologize if I ruined the movie for you at all, but it’s kind of tough to have a discussion of which actress deserves the Oscar (and particularly to discuss character growth) without getting into some spoilers. And I did try to only reveal minor spoilers.
Re: Imelda Staunton – I wasn’t completely sold on her until the 3rd act. I mean, it seemed like for the first 3/4s of the movie all she said is “How about we a cup of tea?”
Yeah, please leave the spoiler stuff to fan sites. I can see spoiling Empire Strikes Back but this movie came out in December. At least type in caps Spoilers or something.
Sorry Mark but this film’s ENDING has to be talked
about. Since it seems to be the KEY point of
the flick. Go figure. Spoilers smoilers. She
falls on her head, then she turns up dead. Boo
to the hoo.
And no Josh. If you had a clue, then you would
have caught that 1 percenter reference. Excuse
me, THE POST OFFICE IS MY HOME (you see there
chuckles? 1 percenter reference! TA DA!)