I was not a fan of Blade Runner 2029, but I probably wasn't the right audience for it to begin with.
Buffista Movies Across the 8th Dimension!
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Ditto here, I'm even willing to put up with Michael Shannon's constant pop-eyed yelling for it. (People keep telling me he's a good actor, and I keep failing to see any evidence of it.)
I personally love Michael Shannon but cannot deny the truth behind the description of "constant pop-eyed yelling" (hahaha PERFECT). I mean, the dude just seems perpetually angry. Interestingly, my favourite Shannon performances are the few in which he is more restrained although no less intense. He was by far the best thing about Nocturnal Animals, a film I despised for its ugly misogynistic streak not-so-hidden inside its glossy meta narrative wrapping, but Shannon manages to be complicated and genuine in the film despite everything else. I also loved him a lot in Jeff Nichol's Midnight Special as a quietly devoted father willing to do anything for his young son, who is being hunted by the government for (spoiler-y) reasons. I don't think he yelled even a single time in that movie, even though the circumstances more than called for it.
One of the films I saw in Toronto was The Current War, which Harvey Weinstein was working on when the sexual abuse story broke. Because of that, I don't even know if the movie will even see the light of the day. The film is a lavish if stodgy biopic and nothing special, but Michael Shannon is cast against type in it as a George Westinghouse, portrayed as a thoroughly decent and unassuming man in contrast to Benedict Cumberbatch's flashy Thomas Edison (Cumberbatch is basically playing Edison as Sherlock, so all in all, pretty boring). I really liked Shannon in it, especially his relationship with his wife, portrayed with wit and style by Katherine Waterstone (displaying A LOT more charisma than was evident in her anemic turn in Fantastic Beasts).
Oh, and if you have never seen Michael Shannon channel a bitchy sorority sister, you are in for a treat: [link]
I wouldn't bother. I usually love Stephen Frears but found this subpar and to be frank, offensive. It struck me as pap colonialist apologia and despite the title, Abdul's character remains a cipher and is mostly there to prop up Victoria's late-life crisis. Judy Dench is predictably excellent in it and the movie is pretty to look at, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. One of the few real disappointments among the films I saw in TIFF.
It was such a terrible movie and then when I found out Frears directed it, I was really angry, because it was so terrible and offensive and he's usually so nuanced and wonderful.
Well, what do people think about this? Am I wrong to really love it?
I think if you enjoy that character's humor (and I do), you'll enjoy that teaser.
Well, what do people think about this? Am I wrong to really love it?
I liked the Ted E. Ruxpin credit!
Chief Engineer: Geordi LaForge
It was such a terrible movie and then when I found out Frears directed it, I was really angry, because it was so terrible and offensive and he's usually so nuanced and wonderful.
Actually, Frears has a reputation for being something of a journeyman director. If a film of his turns out well it usually has more to do with the actors than with him.
The prize for the most overrated director working today has to go to Ridley Scott, though.
But Scott used to be a phenomenal, visionary director. His rep isn't unearned, he's just not living up to it anymore.
Based on reviews and pirated screencaps I saw yesterday, Justice League has Wonder Woman being awesome and Henry Cavill being barechested, so it has at least as much going for it as BvS did. Plans to see it this weekend confirmed.
But Scott used to be a phenomenal, visionary director. His rep isn't unearned, he's just not living up to it anymore.
I disagree with this completely. I don't really know how he earned his reputation; Scott's directorial cackhandedness is all over even his older films like "Blade Runner" and "Thelma and Louise". If these movies work it's in spite of him, and because of the script, the acting and the art direction.
It's not universal, from what I hear the original "Alien" works on every level (I've never seen it in full, because I am a horror wimp), and I actually really enjoyed "The Martian". But I stand by my opinion.
Frears's biggest crime is being a bit boring.