this guy is
I felt like he kind of phoned it in for "Until the Devil Knows You're Dead."
Oscar Noms - Discuss!
- Thread starter mannybolone
- Start date
this guy is
I felt like he kind of phoned it in for "Until the Devil Knows You're Dead."
I don't think it's universally agreed that the score is all that great.
I know I wasn't all that impressed with it. I didn't hate it, and at first
I was into it, thinking that it created great tension. But then it just seemed
to keep going that way, through the entire film, repetitive to the point of
distraction. Also, it can be hard to get nominated for your first score.
It was disqualified:
http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=19224219&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=580223&rfi=6
i just saw king of kong and that flick should get something just for being awesome. best thing i saw from last year by far. you couldnt script a better story. and the dvd commentary with the 2 nerds is awesome.
I saw this last week. To me there are three weak links -
SPOILERS
I agree with Faux on the reveal of Nikolai's true identity. IMO, it is too heavy-handed. It didn't deserve a whole scene, one quick and subtle yet clear pointer would have been good enough.
The incredible coincidence whereby he ends up at the same hospital where Watts works at after the steambath fight.
Naomi Watts. She is flat and brings nothing to her characters. It was just a re-hash of her character in Mulholland Drive in some ways. Her one-dimensional acting worked in Mulholland Drive because that was basically the acting style of the film across the board, but E Promises is a rich and hot-blooded and violent movie, her glowing blond halo, wide-eyed good girl caught in a bad situation shit was, well...shit. The casting was lazy and I am sick to death of her.
Otherwise, this movie was amazing to me. It is a great organized crime film - the right balance of flash and mystery. As good and sexy as Mortenson and Cassel are, it was Mueller-Stahl who shined; he was so scary - he was always on the brink of punching some in the neck or caressing their face. His presence was in every scene, even if he himself wasn't on screen. It is also a very good film about lonlieness to me and this undercurrent gave the movie a lot more depth than your usual thriller. The scene in the basement after Nikolai gets made where he and Kirill hug and it becomes clear that Kirill is in love with Nikolai (and perhaps Nikolai with Kirill)...the look on Cassel's face, the strength of the hug and what is being held back as well - all of it was just a beautiful and terribly sad moment. Actually, all throughout the film, there are beautifully tender moments between the two men.
SPOILERS
I agree with Faux on the reveal of Nikolai's true identity. IMO, it is too heavy-handed. It didn't deserve a whole scene, one quick and subtle yet clear pointer would have been good enough.
The incredible coincidence whereby he ends up at the same hospital where Watts works at after the steambath fight.
Naomi Watts. She is flat and brings nothing to her characters. It was just a re-hash of her character in Mulholland Drive in some ways. Her one-dimensional acting worked in Mulholland Drive because that was basically the acting style of the film across the board, but E Promises is a rich and hot-blooded and violent movie, her glowing blond halo, wide-eyed good girl caught in a bad situation shit was, well...shit. The casting was lazy and I am sick to death of her.
Otherwise, this movie was amazing to me. It is a great organized crime film - the right balance of flash and mystery. As good and sexy as Mortenson and Cassel are, it was Mueller-Stahl who shined; he was so scary - he was always on the brink of punching some in the neck or caressing their face. His presence was in every scene, even if he himself wasn't on screen. It is also a very good film about lonlieness to me and this undercurrent gave the movie a lot more depth than your usual thriller. The scene in the basement after Nikolai gets made where he and Kirill hug and it becomes clear that Kirill is in love with Nikolai (and perhaps Nikolai with Kirill)...the look on Cassel's face, the strength of the hug and what is being held back as well - all of it was just a beautiful and terribly sad moment. Actually, all throughout the film, there are beautifully tender moments between the two men.
care to elaborate? I mean there were some obviously homoerotic scenes and exchanges but you really thought it was "clear"? I'd say it was ambiguous.
C'cmon, let's keep body image out of this.
I actually think for a fairly big star, she brings more to the table than most. Her acting may be a little one-dimensional, but she can have a very expressive face. the scenes in Mulholland Drive where she flips and needs to look evil or depraved or both... damn, there's a glint in her eye that makes me believe it.
I agree that she didn't add much to Eastern Promises, although she didn't detract from my experience, either. Only the trite voice-overs bugged me in that film.
I would say the treatment was ambigious, but coupled with the rumours of him being gay floating around and his messy and excessive reaction to one of the gossipers, the scene where he makes Nikolai f*ck the girl in the brothel as he watches, the estrangement with his father and his incredbily self-destructive behaviour made it clear. It is movie about "the East" after all, a lot of hugging and kissing between men doesn't instantly make me think GAY! There were other situations to point that way.
oh no doubt. the brothel scene was prolly the most obvious. but I thought it was a good treatment, not too obvious.
So I actually saw this last night and really liked it. It wasn't without it's minor flaws but felt the editing and music (pearl jam vindicated?) gave the film a real feel that rode over the minor hiccups.
Hal Holbrook's performance in the film was superb as well - the part where he asks to adopt him was heartbreaking.
I think Michael Clayton was probably one of the worst and most forgettable movies i sat through last year.
Juno was probably the greatest thing since slice bread, but I didn't watch it.
I'm gonna ride for No country, and for Javier Bardem for Best supporting Actor.
Also, Cate Blanchett, she's definitely one of my favorite working actresses.
- spidey
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453115/
as the departed did with infernal affairs last year, so shall juno?
i have that in my netflix queue...should be here tomorrow
Oh god, this movie is terrible! I'm puzzled as to why it got such good reviews around here. I mean, see it for yourself but it's a poorly acted and written after-school special about meanie racists. Borrrring. The only good thing is that the skinhead chicks are dressed pretty hot; I've got a soft spot for girls with fred perry's and a chelsea cut.
BEST ACTOR
Daniel Day-Lewis, "There Will Be Blood" (a big duh)
BEST PICTURE (tough one)
"No Country for Old Men"
"There Will Be Blood" (leaning)
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Javier Bardem, "No Country for Old Men"
Can't ride for any actresses this year. (But I'll always ride for the milfalicous Ms. Blanchett.)
BEST DIRECTOR (?)
Paul Thomas Anderson, "There Will Be Blood"
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, "No Country for Old Men"
Julian Schnabel, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" (need to see this)
BEST ART DIRECTION
"There Will Be Blood"
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
"No Country For Old Men," Roger Deakins
BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
"Sicko"
BEST FILM EDITING
"The Bourne Ultimatum," Christopher Rouse
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
[radioheadfanboy]("There Will Be Blood" not nominated, but i think it should be)[/radioheadfanboy]
BEST SOUND EDITING
"There Will Be Blood"
BEST SOUND MIXING
"The Bourne Ultimatum"
i watched this last night. i enjoyed it although i liked history of violence a lot more.
IMO heavy-handedness is a cronenberg staple. i feel there's never any middle ground with his movies only extremes, either moments of calm quiet or jarring in your face brutality but that's what i like about him. i never thought character development was his strength, maybe that's why Naomi Watts didn't bother me so much. i never watch his movies for the people, i watch it for the spectacle, the overall bizarre atmosphere and sometimes the story is truly special trash. cronenberg characters seem similiar to kubrick characters to me in the sense that they are weirdly vacant (& almost caricature) and that adds more to their intense creepiness and intimidating presense. it's also the thing that makes his movies really entertaining. the tatiana voice overs were really bad though, but it is completely his style. the man loves his cliches. i still feel that he makes B movies with high production values and besides david lynch, i think he is one of the few people that can get away with it.
i have that in my netflix queue...should be here tomorrow
Oh god, this movie is terrible! I'm puzzled as to why it got such good reviews around here. I mean, see it for yourself but it's a poorly acted and written after-school special about meanie racists. Borrrring. The only good thing is that the skinhead chicks are dressed pretty hot; I've got a soft spot for girls with fred perry's and a chelsea cut. We watched this the other night and really liked it. I guess the plot trajectory may have been a little bit predictable but the acting was great and so was the soundtrack.
I agree with this 100%, but I still don't get it why he does this. I know it has to be intentional, but I still can't come up with a sound explanation. It's the same thing with Scorcese's rat in The Departed...
I thought This Is England was cool, if a bit conventional for my taste. And Dead Man's Shoes is better.
Also, the Romanian 4 Months... was good no doubt, but I got the feeling I was watching a Dardenne film-- dare I say it-- without the depth.
Similar threads
