I'm feeling blue about Jordan Ruimy's firm declaration that White Noise, The Son, The Fabelmans, Blonde, The Whale, Master Gardener, She Said, Till, The Eternal Daughter and The Banshees of Inisherin are not going to Telluride.
Login with Patreon to view this post
IndieWire‘s Anne Thompson has posted a 2023 Best Actor prediction piece…basically a checklist of the performances that Thompson believes might end up as noteworthy contenders.
Here’s the HE take on Thompson’s list — those in boldface have at least a chance of breaking through while those not in boldface almost certainly haven’t a prayer.
HE sez there are only seven likely Best Actor contenders right now, and even these seem iffy: Elvis‘s Austin Butler (but no win), Bardo‘s Daniel Giménez Cacho, The Whale‘s Brendan Fraser, Empire of Light‘s Colin Firth, The Son‘s Hugh Jackman, Armageddon Time‘s Banks Repeda and White Noise‘s Adam Driver.
Thompson Frontrunners:
Austin Butler (Elvis)…maybe or probably…can’t decide which.
Park Hae-il (Decision to Leave)…not a chance.
Daniel Kaluuya (Nope)..a totally insane speculation…no way in hell.
Bill Nighy (Living)…an affecting performance, agreed, but not happening.
Adam Sandler (Hustle)…no clue.
Thompson Contenders:
Christian Bale (Amsterdam, The Pale Blue Eye)…not happening.
Daniel Giménez Cacho (Bardo, or A False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths)…promising.
Adam Driver (White Noise)…maybe.
Colin Farrell (The Banshees of Inisherin)…maybe but unlikely.
Colin Firth (Empire of Light)…maybe.
Brendan Fraser (The Whale)…how do you ignore this performance?…the girth factor alone demands attention.
Brendan Gleeson (The Banshees of Inisherin)
Kelvin Harrison Jr. (Chevalier)….no clue.
Hugh Jackman (The Son)….likely.
Brad Pitt (Babylon)…Pitt’s “Jack Conrad”, a tragic figure based partly on John Gilbert but resembling Clark Gable, is a supporting character. They might be able to sell his performance as a lead, but he’s definitely not one in any kind of classic sense.
Eddie Redmayne (The Good Nurse)…no idea.
Song Kang-ho (Broker)…not a chance.
Thompson Long Shots
Timothée Chalamet (Bones and All)
Tom Cruise (Top Gun: Maverick)
Harris Dickinson (Triangle of Sadness)
Jalil Hall (Till)
Paul Mescal (Aftersun)
Jack O’Connell (Lady Chatterley’s Lover)
Robert Pattinson (The Batman)
Cooper Raiff (Cha Cha Real Smooth)
Banks Repeta (Armageddon Time)
Sam Worthington (Avatar: The Way of Water)
As World of Reel‘s Jordan Ruimy pointed out this morning, several hot titles are missing from the just-announced Toronto Film Festival slate — Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu’s Bardo, Todd Field’s TAR, Andrew Dominik’s Blonde, Luca Guadagnino’s Bones and All, Paul Schrader’s The Master Gardener and Noah Baumbach’s White Noise.
The media chorus is saying “TIFF is back!” and that’s fine if they want to adopt that attitude, but these six films represent major auteur-level måterial. It’s possible they’ll be announced as TIFF titles down the road, but to me it’s a sign that TIFF has come down two or three notches, esteem-wise.
Non-Attributable Insider: “I think Hollywood has realized it can skip TIFF by doing Venice and Telluride. European/world audience with one, Oscar voters with the other. TIFF is still great for a commercial release like Spielberg’s The Fabelmans. But these are increasingly moving online, right?”
I’m also feeling twinges of concern about Maria Schrader‘s She Said. The trailer, released a couple of weeks ago, convinced me that She Said is a #MeToo-stamped Spotlight, and yet the ’22 Venice Film Festival has blown it off and it’s not in the TIFF rundown either. Something feels “off.”
Do you believe that Olivia Wilde‘s Don’t Worry, Darling, which stars Harry Styles, isn’t playing TIFF because another, modestly scaled Styles film, My Policeman, is also playing TIFF and certain parties don’t want the media’s attention split in two directions? Seems like a weird call.
The following 2022 Toronto Film Festival titles seem more intriguing than most, according to HE standards:
Steven Spielberg‘s The Fabelmans, Peter Farrelly‘s The Greatest Beer Run Ever, Rian Johnson‘s Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery, Nicholas Stoller‘s Bros, Florian Zeller‘s The Son, Sam Mendes‘ Empire of Light, Ruben Östlund‘s Triangle of Sadness (saw it in Cannes), Darren Aronofsky‘s The Whale, Jafar Panahi‘s No Bears, Mia Hansen-Love‘s One Fine Morning and that’s about it — ten films.
I’m also cautiously intrigued by the prospect of seeing Gabe Polsky‘s Butcher’s Crossing, Alice Winocour‘s Paris Memories, Catherine Hardwicke‘s Prisoner’s Daughter, Joanna Hogg‘s The Eternal Daughter, Sarah Polley‘s Women Talking and Sebastián Lelio‘s The Wonder.
Eight days ago Award Watch‘s Erik Anderson posted a spitball list of 20 Best Picture nominees, listed in order of hunches or likelihood. Boldfaced HE indicates strong agreement on my part; non-boldfaced WHUT indicates uncertainty, skepticism, halfhearted agreement and/or no comment; no reaction at all means no fucking reaction at all.
I will post my own roster of preferential likelies sometime tomorrow morning. Right now I’m figuring the four hottest contenders are Killers of the Flower Moon, Bardo, Babylon and Avatar: The Way of Water. Please respond in some way, shape or form to the current whatever-this-is.
1. The Fabelmans (Universal Pictures) / HE
2. Killers of the Flower Moon (Apple Original Films) / HE
3. Babylon (Paramount Pictures) / HE
4. Bardo, A False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths (Netflix) / HE
5. Everything Everywhere All at Once (A24) / WHUT
6. Avatar: The Way of Water (20th Century Studios) / HE
7. Women Talking (MGM/UAR) / WHUT
8. The Son (Sony Pictures Classics) / HE
9. The Whale (A24) / WHUT
10. Empire of Light (Searchlight Pictures) / WHUT
11. TÁR (Focus Features) / HE
12. Thirteen Lives (Amazon Studios/MGM/UAR)
13. Broker (NEON)
14. The Banshees of Inisherin (Searchlight Pictures)
15. Elvis (Warner Bros)
16. She Said (Universal Pictures) / HE
17. White Noise (Netflix) / HE
18. Napoleon (Apple Original Films) / HE
19. Triangle of Sadness (NEON)
20. Shirley (Netflix)
Due respect but Hollywood Elsewhere will take it as a personal affront — a slur, an insult — if Alejandro G. Inarritu‘s Bardo doesn’t play Telluride ’22.
Many of us have been banking on this Spanish-language Mexican dramedy to play Venice and Telluride for several months now, and I really don’t want to hear about any possible plans to premiere the Netflix release later in the year…seriously, man…c’mon, please don’t.
Too many alleged hotties from big-gun directors are already slated for late ’22 openings — Damien Chazelle‘s Babylon, David O. Russell‘s Amsterdam, Martin Scorsese‘s Killers of the Flower Moon, Sam Mendes‘ Empire of Light, David Fincher‘s The Killer and Steven Spielberg‘s The Fablemans. Adding Bardo to this list would be excessive.
Come Labor Day columnists and film mavens like myself need to see good, nutritious, X-factor films — theatrical experiences that excite, disturb and challenge — to keep our spirits up and make our semi-miserable lives feel whole and perhaps even vibrant. This is why Inarritu ducking out of Telluride simply won’t do. We’re talking feelings of bitterness, depression and most of all abandonment.
Official Bardo synopsis: “A nostalgic comedy set against an epic personal journey. It chronicles the story of a renowned Mexican journalist and documentary filmmaker, who returns home and works through an existential crisis as he grapples with his identity, familial relationships, the folly of his memories as well as the past of his country. He seeks answers in his past to reconcile who he is in the present.”
Daniel Giménez Cacho plays the journalist-filmmaker (basically a stand-in for Inarritu himself); Griselda Siciliani costars.
Bardo finished principal photography, remember, last September — 10 effing months ago. It was announced last April that Netflix had acquired the for theatrical and streaming. Shot by Darius Khondji in 65mm, the film’s actual title is Bardo (or False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths).
Words with the potential to strike fear into the hearts of Telluride regulars: “Bardo is a cinematic experience that has inspired us to create a release strategy designed for the film to penetrate culture in the biggest and widest way. We will give film lovers everywhere the opportunity to experience the film through a global theatrical release and the film’s worldwide release on Netflix.” — Netflix honcho Scott Stuber.
It didn’t get the love it deserved, but John Lee Hancock‘s The Founder, which opened a little more than five years ago, is easily one of the most fascinating and easily re-watchable dramas of the 20teens — half character study and half hard-scrabble success story, and a film about a highly unusual protagonist — Michael Keaton‘s Ray Kroc — who straddles the line between admirable and not-so-admirable.
Most people don’t know what to do with a character like Kroc. Half-good and half-shifty characters are hard to relax with. It’s okay if a lead character is a bit of an ethical muddle, but audiences generally like their main protagonists to be more sympathetic than not.
Kroc and Scarlett O’Hara aside, what movie characters are the most memorable half-and-halfers? And don’t tell me that Charles Foster Kane belongs in this fraternity. Because he doesn’t.
The Founder is basically the story of how Kroc persuaded the earnest, slightly doltish, small-time-thinking McDonald brothers (Dick and Mick, respectively played by Nick Offerman and John Carroll Lynch) to let him franchise their small fast-food business and turn it into a super-sized empire.
But more generally The Founder is a nuts-and-bolts story about what a scramble it is to grow a business and then stay afloat with all the serpents snapping at your heels.
Robert Siegel‘s script is a portrait of dog-eat-dog entrepenurial capitalism — a movie that basically says “sometimes it takes a pushy, manipulative shithead to orchestrate a big success.”
Except Keaton’s Kroc is not really a shithead. He’s just a hungry, wily go-getter who believes in the organizational basics that made McDonald’s a hit during its early California years (1948 to ’54) and who has the drive and the smarts to build it into a major money-maker. Your heart is basically with the guy, and I was surprised to feel this way after having nursed vaguely unpleasant thoughts about Kroc (scrappy Republican, Nixon and Reagan supporter) my entire life.
You know who is unlikable? Offerman’s Dick McDonald — a guy who’s always complaining, always frowning or bitching about something, always a stopper. The bottom line is that Dick doesn’t get it and neither does Mac, but Ray does. And to my great surprise I found myself taking Ray’s side and even chucking when he tells Dick to go fuck himself in Act Three. Ray is a bit of a prick but not a monster. And I understood where he was coming from. He’s a little shifty here and there, but I couldn’t condemn him all that strongly.
Keaton turns the key in just the right way. He doesn’t try to win you over but he doesn’t play Ray as a bad guy either — he plays it somewhere in between, and it’s that “in between” that makes The Founder feel quietly fascinating. It allows you to root for a not-so-nice-but-at-the-same-time-not-so-bad guy without feeling too conflicted.
And yet The Founder didn’t exactly burn up the box-office. It wound up grossing $12.8 million domestic and $24.1 million worldwide.
Colorizing black-and-white movies is a heinous practice as a rule, except in the case of certain films. Some day a skillfully colorized King Kong could be a keeper. Colorizations are still far from the mark, but they’re getting there. The idea in colorizing a 1933 film is to make the color look primitive, almost like the old two-color process. Kind of a glowing amber-brownish tint. Look at that grayish, slightly blue sky behind the Empire State Building…not bad!
I’ll give Lightyear credit for its apparent interest in shaded lighting schemes and misty visual textures. There’s one shot that looks like Dagobah from The Empire Strikes Back. This aside, Disney-Pixar spinoffs of this sort are nothing but banal family fare + corporate jizzwhizz.
An oldie but goodie...please excuse the laziness. At least I've added a few lines:
Login with Patreon to view this post
Two and a half months ago I ranted against the critics who’d posted thumbs-down reviews about Nick Jarecki‘s thoughtful, entirely sufficient Crisis. HE to RT & Metacritic gang: “You guys can’t give a 26% RT rating to a film that’s ambitious and moderately gripping and narratively efficient for the most part…it deserves a pass, for God’s sake! You can say it has an issue or two but nothing fatal…c’mon, it’s more or less fine!”
The same kind of unwarranted dismissals have greeted Phillip Noyce‘s Above Suspicion, which began streaming yesterday. It currently has a 29% RT rating, and a 48% over at Metacritic. And it doesn’t add up. We’ve all seen films that have earned low aggregate critic scores, and we know how they tend to feel and play out. Above Suspicion doesn’t fit this mold at all.
Trust me — this is a first-rate, redneck-love-affair-gone-bad flick that feels like it was made in 1977, and that in itself makes it something to savor on all kinds of levels.
Excerpt from initial HE review, “The Girl From Lonesome Holler”, 7.24.17: “Most people would define ‘redneck film’ as escapist trash in the Burt Reynolds mode, but there have been a small handful that have portrayed rural boondock types and their tough situations in ways that are top-tier and real-deal. My favorites in this realm are John Boorman‘s Deliverance, Billy Bob Thornton‘s Sling Blade, and Lamont Johnson‘s The Last American Hero.
“Noyce’s Above Suspicion is the absolute, dollars-to-donuts equal of these films, or at least a close relation with a similar straight-cards, no-bullshit attitude.”
Why have a majority of critics taken a dump on it? Some simply haven’t liked it — fine. Others may have problems with the social-cultural elements. Critics often give passes to mediocre films because of certain political ingredients. A story about a desperately unhappy trailer-trash wife losing her bearings and getting dumped by her FBI lover doesn’t exactly scream “seal of good wokeness” or “#MeToo-approved.” Some critics may also have a problem with a film reflecting the values and living conditions of rural rightwing backwater types. Most critics will deny it, but they know there are some films they can’t pan while there’s no downside to slamming a film like Above Suspicion. Do the math.
Another issue was the fact that this poor film was snared in distribution troubles for nearly four years, and to some that means “must be problematic.” The trouble had nothing to do with quality, and was caused, in fact, by a couple of cowboy producers.
Empire‘s Al Horner called it “an enveloping if stately paced thriller that doubles up as a portrait of a broken America: one where impoverished people fall into addiction, then into crime and finally into the witness stand, only to be failed by the people meant to protect and serve them.”
Deadline‘s Pete Hammond: “Noyce has captured the feel of a coal-driven small community and the darkness lying beneath the surface. A true-life saga, Above Suspicion benefits from a strong dose of authenticity anchored by a revelatory performance from Emilia Clarke, who nails the demeanor and accent of a doomed soul trying to escape a beaten life. The star’s Game of Thrones fans might find her virtually unrecognizable here, but it is a thoroughly accomplished performance.”
“Suspicion About To Pop Through,” posted on 4.1.21: “Noyce always delivers with clarity and discipline but this is arguably the most arresting forward-thrust action flick he’s done since Clear and Present Danger. Plus it boasts a smart, fat-free, pared-down script by Mississippi Burning‘s Chris Gerolmo, some haunting blue-tinted cinematography by Eliot Davis (Out of Sight, Twilight) and some wonderfully concise editing by Martin Nicholson.
“Above Suspicion damn sure feels like a ’70s film. I mean that in the most complimentary way you could possibly imagine. It’s about real people, tough decisions, yokel culture, corruption, Percocets, hot car sex and lemme outta here. There’s no sense of 21st Century corporate wankery. Adults who believe in real movies made this thing, and they did so with an eye for tension and inevitable plot turns and fates dictated by character and anxiety and, this being rural Kentucky, bad karma and bad luck.”
Maher again: “72% of GenZ say they’d like to be an online celebrity, and 54% of GenZ and Millennials say they would become an influencer, ‘given the opportunity’. If, you know, it wasn’t too much work, like making a sex tape. Speaking of which…
[Starting at 4:40] “I can’t be in this time when we’re madly on the hunt for anything with the slightest whiff of white privilege, and then feel badly for…Paris Hilton? Quite the reverse — maybe it’s Paris who owes us an apology. For being Patient Zero for today’s vapid, entitled, famous-for-nothing culture. She kind of birthed the world in which every 15 year-old with a phone aspires to be an influencer. She’s the face that launched a thousand little shits.
“Paris led directly to the Kardashians and then to housewives and teen moms and Heidis and Snooki…a generation of young girls who look up to the ‘role models’ who managed to turn an unenthusiastic blowjob into an empire. Young people who think talent…’my talent is being me! And you wanting to live my life.’ Kylie Jenner is a billionaire based on her ability to sit near a pool.”
I have a certain affection for films shot in Ultra Panavision 70 and Camera 65, processes from the ’50s and ’60s that yielded aspect ratios of 2.76:1. (They were technically identical or damn near.) Actually, there were 11 such films in all, but I only have a fondness for three — Ben-Hur (Camera 65), Mutiny on the Bounty (UP70) and The Fall of the Roman Empire (ditto).
I never got around to seeing Raintree County, which also was shot in Camera 65.
Bounty and Empire were shot by the great Robert Surtees, and the framings and lighting are quite elegant. Empire was shot by Robert Krasker (Odd Man Out, Brief Encounter, The Third Man).
I have no affection at all for Quentin Tarantino‘s The Hateful Eight, which squandered the UP70 potential by mostly shooting inside the darkly lighted Minnie’s Haberdashery.
I’ve never seen Ken Annakin‘s The Battle of the Bulge (UP70, released on 12.16.65), and after watching this Smilebox trailer it’s possible I may never set the time aside.
The dialogue conveys stodginess, or what I would call an overdose of “officer-talk”. You can tell the whole thing smells. Any mid-’50s-and-after movie costarring Dana Andrews is something to be feared. German soldiers speaking German-accented English was outlawed after The Longest Day, but Annakin went there anyway. The Wikipedia page features a long list of historical inaccuracies. Dwight D. Eisenhower came out of retirement to denounce the film for gross inaccuracies. It was shot in Spain with little or no snow on the ground, and too many scenes feature the wrong kind of typography (I’ve been to the the Ardennes forest) and not enough pine trees.
- All Hail Tom White, Taciturn Hero of “Killers of the Flower Moon”
Roughly two months ago a very early draft of Eric Roth‘s screenplay for Killers of the Flower Moon (dated 2.20.17,...
More » - Dead-End Insanity of “Nomadland”
Frances McDormand‘s Fern was strong but mule-stubborn and at the end of the day self-destructive, and this stunted psychology led...
More » - Mia Farrow’s Best Performances?
Can’t decide which performance is better, although I’ve always leaned toward Tina Vitale, her cynical New Jersey moll behind the...
More »
- Hedren’s 94th
Two days ago (1.19) a Facebook tribute congratulated Tippi Hedren for having reached her 94th year (blow out the candles!)...
More » - Criminal Protagonists
A friend suggested a list of the Ten Best American Crime Flicks of the ‘70s. By which he meant films...
More » - “‘Moby-Dick’ on Horseback”
I’ve never been able to give myself over to Sam Peckinpah’s Major Dundee, a 1965 Civil War–era western, and I’ve...
More »