Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
Since we have had similar taste in movies in the past (both of us apparently have excellent taste  ), I've got to throw in my two cents worth regarding your comments. I would actually be okay with any of the following movies getting Best Picture: Argo, Les Miserables, Amour. I thought all three of them were better than any of the other remaining six (okay, I didn't see Django, but I saw all the rest). I'm really not sure which one I think will win, but I'm hoping it's one of those three.
I just saw Amour yesterday and absolutely loved it. I mean LOVED IT. I will be very, very unhappy if Emmannuelle Riva doesn't get Best Actress. I have not seen "The Master." It's no longer playing in Salt Lake City but I can't get it on DVD yet either. Darn. So it sounds like you'd recommend it -- or at least thought the acting to be pretty great. |
Great minds indeed !
I think "The Master" will divide many people because it is quite an opaque cryptic film in many ways. It seems to leaves more questions unanswered than not. It is not an easy film to like.
What stood out for me though was the acting which quite frankly was superb across the board. Joaquin Phoenix is astonishing. He exudes an animal raw energy, something unhinged and threatening and yet at the same time almost vulnerable. Amy Adams in a very understated role and yet such a strong character nonethless, also full of unspoken menace, a sort of Lady McBeth but far, far more subtle.
And Philip Seymour-Hoffman a picture of bonhommie and almost benevolence riddled with deeply disturbing undertones and focussed self serving mania and egotism about to explode any moment. A man on the edge who believes himself in control and is anything but.
Hubby was left underwhelmed and in a way I understand why because the acting is just so good it almost leaves nothing behind to eclipse it like the story , plot and character development. It is almost like watching an acting masterclass and it could be distracting to some people I think. You become so focussed on the acting you start to neglect to become engrossed into the plot.
You'll have to see for yourself and get back to me !
I have not seen "Les Miserables", I must admit as a huge fan of Victor Hugo and the non singing films, I simply cannot cope with the musical version of it. I saw the musical on stage and wanted to rip my own eyes out , it was to me extremely painful and I loathed it. I understand people adore "Les Mis" musical so anything I say will be seen as blasphemy but I felt the book I loved so much was desacrated !
I am quite sure the acting is wonderful as it has quite a cast but not for me.
I was told by a musician friend of mine that most people who love Opera usually hate musicals. I adore Opera.
Heathen no doubt for "Les Mis" fans but I simply cannot force myself to like it. "My Fair Lady" is still the only musical I like and love.
"Amour" I think is just so, so good it pains me that the majority of cinema goers are unable to grasp exactly what highs acting can reach. Because it is a foreign film it will only be seen by a small minority of people and that is such a shame. The Grandiose and the Epic too often outshines the quiet and understated in Hollywood when some of the very best films are exactly those of a more "sedate" disposition IMO.
"Django" I could not bear to see. I suspect for the same reasons that you had reservations about seeing it.
An American friend of mine ( who is also male and quite a bit younger than me) is almost obsessed with Tarantino's films and I am afraid they leave me utterly cold. I am obviously not the target audience. Yes the scripts are witty but I have no patience for orgies of gore and violence just for the sake of it and swearing as a way to make a point also does nothing for me.
To me Tarantino revels in violence so much there has to be some kind of psychological disorder of sorts at play. He seems to just love it a little too much for my liking.
I don't find it terribly mature and once again I know I shall upset some of his devotees and "disciples" who can see no wrong with a man who is unable to actually make a film without turning it into blood/revenge porn. Because to me porn it is. Like "normal" porn it is there to titillate and excite and I do find it extremely disturbing.
Gore per se has never phased me, I did Anthropology as a second subject and had many medical classes ( with a couple of autopsies) so I am not squeamish in the sense most people interpret it.
It just offends my sensibilities because in my opinion it adds nothing to the plot and if anything detracts from it. It becomes a distraction and an excuse to stop from making a film with a bit more maturity and depth to it.
And I find swearing so, so dull too. Another distraction.
As mature adults we all know what blood, gore, violence is and our imaginations are capable of far worse things than someone like Tarantino can ever truly portray on the screen. Like gratuituous sex on the screen I find it superfluous to my experience. I know what violence is, I know what sex is, I really don't need to have it shoved in my face to "experience" it. Sometimes less is more.
You can make a very potent war movie without showing that much gore. Tarantino to me needs to be taught restraint with violence and maybe just maybe see a shrink in my opinion.
When violence becomes entertainment and pleasurable then I start to think something has gone wrong somewhere , somehow....
Violence should repulse and disgust us, it is not supposed to give some people their jollies.
I go the theatre a lot and I know some of the most potent and effective ways I have seen to convey war for example have been on the stage with virtually no props and no gore. Just great acting . Your imagination and the script does the rest. That to me is the essence of storytelling, it is more about what is left unsaid and unseen than what is just obvious. The obvious lessens and deadens the effect.
I saw a wonderful play last year about the trenches in WW1 and the horrors of the war. It had virtually no blood at all , but the acting conveyed so much , the soundtrack of shells dropping and men screaming in the far distance, the claustrophobia of a set which was dark and cramped made it so, so beautifully effective. I felt I was there with those men, the fear, the hopes, the hopelessness, the sheer terror, and raging against it all, the comraderie of it all. You could almost smell the terror and the horror of it all.
The horrors brought to life not by bits of human bodies flying left right and centre but by the humanity and the experiences of those men. A wonderful example of how violence need not be obvious to have a real kick.
Rant over. Which was not addressed to you of course Darling !
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
