What Movie Did You Watch, Pt. 1: Starting Over

[dws1982]

I think Finnegan's Wake is one biggest pieces of crap ever considered major literature, but Dubliners is truly great, several of the stories are outright masterpieces, and The Dead may be the best piece of fiction in the English language.

[misplaced validity]

Personal Effects - Considering this stars Michelle Pfeiffer, Ashton Kuchar, and Kathy Bates yet went straight to DVD (I think) and is airing on the Lifetime Movie Network, I was expecting something terrible. Instead it's...not bad (B- level). I didn't know it was based on a Rick Moody short story. Kuchar's acting seems awkward at first, but in reality it suits the part. Pfeiffer and Bates can do this kind of movie well in their sleep. I was mostly surprised at how well the stuff with Pfeiffer's deaf son was handled.

[misplaced validity]

Kramer vs Kramer - It had been ages since I'd seen this one. It holds up really well. I love that, even though Hoffman is the main character and we come to feel for him, the movie shows all sides. The chemistry between Hoffman and Justin Henry is terrific. Meryl Streep is solid in her role and I love that a character like hers was written, but I think Jane Alexander gives the more grounded, resonant performance.

[tonygoldenemmy]

I actually prefer Alexander over Streep, though Mariel Hemingway in Manhattan trumps them both in Supporting Actress that year.

[NGL]

Life Is Beautiful
1997, Roberto Benigni

I took another opportunity to watch on TCM a film I had yet to see.

I find Life Is Beautiful a good film that had the potential to be a great film, but is marred by the story delving into too much outrageousness to serve the subject matter. About the first hour concerns Benigni's character wooing a princess. As I knew going in that this is about a father and his young son in a concentration camp and the father's attempt to protect his son by convincing him that this is all some game, I thought the attempt to woo the princess was part of a story he is telling his son while they are already in the camp. I was struck to find that his character is actually wooing the princess and he and his son end up in the camp later.

The reason I was struck was because I thought the wooing was so full of unlikely coincidences that it did not correspond well to something that was actually reality. This over-fantasy in a reality situation continued even to scenes in the camp, such as Benigni's character's non-translation to other memebers of the camp and its consequences, or lack thereof.

This is too bad, because during times when the father's ruse is actually more grounded in reality, the film is quite adapt at simultaneously bringing both humor and pathos. This is most on display at the ending, which almost seamlessly moves from heart-breaking tragedy to surprising humor mixed with the cheer of somewhat-winning-against-all-odds.

Both the coutryside photography during the first hour and the score effectively added to the atmosphere.

B

[mahogany soul]

(03-03-2015 04:59 AM)tonygoldenemmy Wrote:  I actually prefer Alexander over Streep, though Mariel Hemingway in Manhattan trumps them both in Supporting Actress that year.

Interesting. I consider Kramer vs Kramer and Manhattan to be my favorite Streep performances. I don't think she's ever been more natural and radiant than her late 70s work. I love that BAFTA nominated her in Lead for "Kramer" and Supporting for "Manhattan".

[tonygoldenemmy]

What's amazing is how ga-ga the BAFTAs went for Manhattan - 10 nods, including four acting nominations and even a nom for Best Sound (it ended up winning Best Picture and Screenplay) - and yet the film pretty much tanked with the Oscars.

[misplaced validity]

(03-04-2015 07:25 AM)mahogany soul Wrote:  

(03-03-2015 04:59 AM)tonygoldenemmy Wrote:  I actually prefer Alexander over Streep, though Mariel Hemingway in Manhattan trumps them both in Supporting Actress that year.

Interesting. I consider Kramer vs Kramer and Manhattan to be my favorite Streep performances. I don't think she's ever been more natural and radiant than her late 70s work. I love that BAFTA nominated her in Lead for "Kramer" and Supporting for "Manhattan".

Really? She's in no way Lead in Kramer. Wow.

Anyway, I do like her in Kramer a lot, but "natural" isn't a word I would use to describe her in the performance. In fact, I think her affected style is why she was cast; it works for the character. Alexander is the definition of "natural" in the film, though. Just my opinion.

I recorded The Deer Hunter and am going to watch it soon. Streep was really getting some high-profile supporting roles at that time.

[misplaced validity]

Carnage - While I'm not sure I fully buy the way the one couple keeps staying, damn if the acting isn't terrific. I also love how alliances change based on the course of discussion, and how it shows people ultimately argue to be right regardless of anything else. And there are some truly LOL moments, most courtesy of John C Reilly but from all involved.

[Culturegeek]

Oh, the explosion of Streep. Here's her 1976-1979

1976: Tony nomination
1977: Emmy win, film debut in best picture nominee
1978: First oscar nomination, best picture winner, rave reviews
1979: Three films, raves for each, sweeps critics awards on her way to oscar.