What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (4 Viewers)

Death at a Funeral. Wife and I enjoyed it very much. Only a few laugh-out-loud moments (maybe 4? 5?), but a fun movie.

 
Saw "Bound" for the 1st time tonight. I've always had a thing for Jennifer Tilly and she looked good. The dialogue was pretty stilted, but the story kept my interest. Definitely worth a rental.

 
In the Valley of Elah

Liked this movie quite a bit. Some people might be annoyed with the director's "message" not being very subtle, but still worth a watch. I did feel that the ending lacked the punch that the rest of the movie was building up to - seemed to fizzle a little bit at the end.

On kind of a tangent here, but this is another example for me of :goodposting: when I look at acting nominations for the AWs. I am pretty sure that Tommy Lee Jones is up for best actor, but he was exactly the same throughout the whole movie. Sure his character had a presence and you did feel for him, but there really wasn't much to him, IMO. Don't know why acting exactly the same throughout all the scenes warrants a best actor nod.
I liked this movie -- and thought Tommy Lee was great -- right up until the very end. That was really dumb and unrealistic. It actually took away from the rest of the movie, in my opinion.
 
In the Valley of Elah

Liked this movie quite a bit. Some people might be annoyed with the director's "message" not being very subtle, but still worth a watch. I did feel that the ending lacked the punch that the rest of the movie was building up to - seemed to fizzle a little bit at the end.

On kind of a tangent here, but this is another example for me of :goodposting: when I look at acting nominations for the AWs. I am pretty sure that Tommy Lee Jones is up for best actor, but he was exactly the same throughout the whole movie. Sure his character had a presence and you did feel for him, but there really wasn't much to him, IMO. Don't know why acting exactly the same throughout all the scenes warrants a best actor nod.
I think Jones is a fantastic actor, but certainly that's an understated role for him. If you put a mediocre actor in that spot, Jones' gifts do seem obvious. He seems to have a lot of subtext in his acting.
 
In the Valley of Elah

Liked this movie quite a bit. Some people might be annoyed with the director's "message" not being very subtle, but still worth a watch. I did feel that the ending lacked the punch that the rest of the movie was building up to - seemed to fizzle a little bit at the end.

On kind of a tangent here, but this is another example for me of :blackdot: when I look at acting nominations for the AWs. I am pretty sure that Tommy Lee Jones is up for best actor, but he was exactly the same throughout the whole movie. Sure his character had a presence and you did feel for him, but there really wasn't much to him, IMO. Don't know why acting exactly the same throughout all the scenes warrants a best actor nod.
I think Jones is a fantastic actor, but certainly that's an understated role for him. If you put a mediocre actor in that spot, Jones' gifts do seem obvious. He seems to have a lot of subtext in his acting.
I thought he was terrific in the movie. He didn't even need to speak.
 
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.

I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Idiocracy - Really interesting premise I thought, it had a few funny moments, but overall it fell flat. They could have done a lot more with it. But was worth 80 minutes I thought.

 
Saw "Bound" for the 1st time tonight. I've always had a thing for Jennifer Tilly and she looked good. The dialogue was pretty stilted, but the story kept my interest. Definitely worth a rental.
The scene with the milk and the dripping blood was straight Coen Bros and brilliant. The rest, I don't remember so much... boobies, right?
 
Idiocracy - Really interesting premise I thought, it had a few funny moments, but overall it fell flat. They could have done a lot more with it. But was worth 80 minutes I thought.
Idiocracy really, really disappointed me. Found it funnier glancing at it the second time while it played in the background (the car with the dildo, etc).
 
There Will Be Blood - :thumbup:

Overrated movie and severely overrated performance by Daniel Day Lewis. BTW -

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

Were the two big reveals ( 1) Eli and his brother Paul are twins, 2) H.W. wasn't Daniels' son) supposed to be big reveals? Or is it assumed that we in the audience know? At which point I have to ask why we care when it's revealed to the characters..

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

Couple kids movies:

The Water Horse - :unsure: As long as a kids movie is relatively entertaining and not intellectually insulting, it's not a bad movie.

Enchanted - :unsure: I kept expecting more. I thought there would be more humor. Sarandon was the wrong choice for the witch.

 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.

 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I agree with all of this. I loved the ending's confounding wackiness, too.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
DDL is a tremendous actor. He was great in My Left Foot.But in TWBB, all he did was talk interestingly. And that was simply based on other people:
Daniel Day-Lewis based his voice for and characterization of Daniel Plainview in part on old recordings of the director, writer, and actor John Huston. An article by Christopher Goodwin in the Sunday Times (of London) revealed Paul Thomas Anderson sent Day-Lewis documentaries about Huston while Day-Lewis was preparing to play the role.
:hot: I'm just not impressed. I know I'm in the minority.
 
Andy - as for your spoilers, I'll take a stab at what all that meant

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

I don't think HW's adoption or Eli and Paul being twins is meant to be any kind of surprise. Both are presented pretty obviously early on.

The title "There Will Be Blood" is a play on both the ending of the movie (you know violence was coming - the movie's soundtrack, the title, everything was letting you know that at the end of the movie there would be blood), as well as Plainview's obsession with finding family. He adopts HW when HW's father is killed as an effort to assauge that lonliness in him but when HW becomes damaged goods he's quick to abandon him in favor of the man who he thinks is his brother.

This obsession with family is why Plainview freaks out when he thinks the man from the big oil company is telling him how to run his family

When the brother turns out to be false, Plainview kills him despite the man's insistence that he didn't intend to do any harm, because to Plainview there could have been no deeper harm done.

The significance of Eli and Paul being brothers is that even amongst blood, there is still competition and betrayal. Also, I'm not sure if I am remembering correctly but when Plainview is chasing Eli around the bowling alley doesn't Eli try and insist that they are brothers? (Figuratively, of course)

Essentially the movie is a study of a man who is both obsessed with winning and taking out the competition as well as an obsession with the family that he does not have. He needs to be on top so he is desperate to have family because he thinks those are the only ones he's able to stomach having close to him at the top.

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

 
Andy - as for your spoilers, I'll take a stab at what all that meant

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

I don't think HW's adoption or Eli and Paul being twins is meant to be any kind of surprise. Both are presented pretty obviously early on.

The title "There Will Be Blood" is a play on both the ending of the movie (you know violence was coming - the movie's soundtrack, the title, everything was letting you know that at the end of the movie there would be blood), as well as Plainview's obsession with finding family. He adopts HW when HW's father is killed as an effort to assauge that lonliness in him but when HW becomes damaged goods he's quick to abandon him in favor of the man who he thinks is his brother.

This obsession with family is why Plainview freaks out when he thinks the man from the big oil company is telling him how to run his family

When the brother turns out to be false, Plainview kills him despite the man's insistence that he didn't intend to do any harm, because to Plainview there could have been no deeper harm done.

The significance of Eli and Paul being brothers is that even amongst blood, there is still competition and betrayal. Also, I'm not sure if I am remembering correctly but when Plainview is chasing Eli around the bowling alley doesn't Eli try and insist that they are brothers? (Figuratively, of course)

Essentially the movie is a study of a man who is both obsessed with winning and taking out the competition as well as an obsession with the family that he does not have. He needs to be on top so he is desperate to have family because he thinks those are the only ones he's able to stomach having close to him at the top.

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();
That's an accurate summary, I believe. I guess I just didn't find it all that compelling. Just my opinion, though.

Must not have been enough spaceships and explosions for my tastes. ;)

 
One more thing. I doubt I'll ever watch that movie again whereas, I am quite positive No Country for Old Men will be one I'll watch many times in future years.

 
Andy - as for your spoilers, I'll take a stab at what all that meant

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

I don't think HW's adoption or Eli and Paul being twins is meant to be any kind of surprise. Both are presented pretty obviously early on.

The title "There Will Be Blood" is a play on both the ending of the movie (you know violence was coming - the movie's soundtrack, the title, everything was letting you know that at the end of the movie there would be blood), as well as Plainview's obsession with finding family. He adopts HW when HW's father is killed as an effort to assauge that lonliness in him but when HW becomes damaged goods he's quick to abandon him in favor of the man who he thinks is his brother.

This obsession with family is why Plainview freaks out when he thinks the man from the big oil company is telling him how to run his family

When the brother turns out to be false, Plainview kills him despite the man's insistence that he didn't intend to do any harm, because to Plainview there could have been no deeper harm done.

The significance of Eli and Paul being brothers is that even amongst blood, there is still competition and betrayal. Also, I'm not sure if I am remembering correctly but when Plainview is chasing Eli around the bowling alley doesn't Eli try and insist that they are brothers? (Figuratively, of course)

Essentially the movie is a study of a man who is both obsessed with winning and taking out the competition as well as an obsession with the family that he does not have. He needs to be on top so he is desperate to have family because he thinks those are the only ones he's able to stomach having close to him at the top.

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();
;)
 
Fallerjw said:
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.
That older blonde buxom stripper was on an episode of Seinfeld. Guess which one.
 
El Floppo said:
John Stamos said:
Idiocracy - Really interesting premise I thought, it had a few funny moments, but overall it fell flat. They could have done a lot more with it. But was worth 80 minutes I thought.
Idiocracy really, really disappointed me. Found it funnier glancing at it the second time while it played in the background (the car with the dildo, etc).
For that concept, I think there are twice as many good jokes in any random episode of Futurama.
 
Fallerjw said:
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.
That older blonde buxom stripper was on an episode of Seinfeld. Guess which one.
older blonde buxom stripper - anything interesting coming up involving her?Seinfeld - Parking Garage?
 
Fallerjw said:
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.
That older blonde buxom stripper was on an episode of Seinfeld. Guess which one.
older blonde buxom stripper - anything interesting coming up involving her?Seinfeld - Parking Garage?
I don't want to give anything away, but it seems like every character is pretty important in Carnivale.Yep, parking garage.
 
Nigel Tufnel said:
Drifter said:
One more thing. I doubt I'll ever watch that movie again whereas, I am quite positive No Country for Old Men will be one I'll watch many times in future years.
Agree, again. I just bought NCFOM yesterday.
Yep. That's one of the reasons that I thought OCfOM was >>>> TWWB. Right after the movie ended I had the desire to watch it again. After TWWB ended it was more of glad I watched it, but probably won't ever watch it again.
 
Last night I watched Before the Devil Knows You're Dead

LOVED the movie. IMO this should've been up for a best picture award. Thought it was the 2nd best movie from last year that I've seen (behind No Country). Made even better by watching the bonus feature and listening to Lumet talk about the acting and the style. Instead of the movie being a crime thriller, he saw it more of a melodrama and b/c of that wanted to push the actors over the top and to the edge of being too much. Highly recommend the movie.

 
I deleted my post because I realized this one is "the rental edition".. can someone point me to the "other" edition?? TIA.

 
I deleted my post because I realized this one is "the rental edition".. can someone point me to the "other" edition?? TIA.
Bah. I put new movie reviews in here, as well. Too lazy to look for another thread.
Works for me for now:Viewed Street Kings on Saturday. :shrug:

For someone that only sees 6 to 8 movies a year at the theater I enjoyed this.

It took a bit to get used to Keanu Reeves being a "bad" guy.

But as they get into the movie and discuss some past things that happened to him you can understand why he turns that way.

Some over the top acting at times, and parts you just have to remember it is just a movie. But overall it was worth the $4.50. :thumbup:

Also, a couple nice performances by T.V. actors including House(a good :lol: moment when he looks like he is playing his doctor role) & Sucre from Prison Break.

 
Just got done watching Into the Wild.

Absolutely loved the movie. Couple cheesy moments (ala Castaway) when he is interacting with himself, but other than that it was great. Beautiful scenery, great story, etc... Highly recommended. :goodposting:
I've been reading this thread forever and finally decided to chime in...This was a very well made movie. The scenery was great, the story was great, the acting was good for the most part (especially the supporting cast - the lead actor was just OK) - but what really made the movie for me was the music. Probably Eddie Vedder's best work since the second PJ CD. I didn't have many expectations going in, and ordinarily I am not a fan of Penn at all, but maybe he's better behind the camera than in front of it.

 
Just got done watching Into the Wild.

Absolutely loved the movie. Couple cheesy moments (ala Castaway) when he is interacting with himself, but other than that it was great. Beautiful scenery, great story, etc... Highly recommended. :goodposting:
I've been reading this thread forever and finally decided to chime in...This was a very well made movie. The scenery was great, the story was great, the acting was good for the most part (especially the supporting cast - the lead actor was just OK) - but what really made the movie for me was the music. Probably Eddie Vedder's best work since the second PJ CD. I didn't have many expectations going in, and ordinarily I am not a fan of Penn at all, but maybe he's better behind the camera than in front of it.
Veder does great work on the Dead Man Walking soundtrack.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
 
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.
That older blonde buxom stripper was on an episode of Seinfeld. Guess which one.
She's who I thought of when that "Women You're Strangely Attracted To" thread was floating around. She's a brick ####house fo sho, but there was just something about her in Carnivale that gave me a tingling sensation in my loins. :thumbdown:
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
I guess it's all subjective, since I loved Lewis in Gangs :thumbdown:
 
Put Carnivale in my netflix que based on recommendations here. So far my only regret is that I only had the first 2 discs. I finished them and am looking forward to the rest of them showing up.I'm definitely waiting to find out how it all unravels, plus it's nice that they throw in a little toplessness from time to time.
That older blonde buxom stripper was on an episode of Seinfeld. Guess which one.
She's who I thought of when that "Women You're Strangely Attracted To" thread was floating around. She's a brick ####house fo sho, but there was just something about her in Carnivale that gave me a tingling sensation in my loins. :thumbdown:
Oh HELLS yeah. I'd totally do that broad.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
I guess it's all subjective, since I loved Lewis in Gangs :blackdot:
Me too. :popcorn: Is it not cool to like the performance because it got so much mainstream love?? The Butcher is one of my favorite characters ever.

"Here's the thing... I don't give a tuppenny #### about your moral conundrum, you meat-headed ####-sack... That's pretty much the thing."

 
In the Valley of Elah

Liked this movie quite a bit. Some people might be annoyed with the director's "message" not being very subtle, but still worth a watch. I did feel that the ending lacked the punch that the rest of the movie was building up to - seemed to fizzle a little bit at the end.

On kind of a tangent here, but this is another example for me of :rolleyes: when I look at acting nominations for the AWs. I am pretty sure that Tommy Lee Jones is up for best actor, but he was exactly the same throughout the whole movie. Sure his character had a presence and you did feel for him, but there really wasn't much to him, IMO. Don't know why acting exactly the same throughout all the scenes warrants a best actor nod.
I think Jones is a fantastic actor, but certainly that's an understated role for him. If you put a mediocre actor in that spot, Jones' gifts do seem obvious. He seems to have a lot of subtext in his acting.
I thought he was terrific in the movie. He didn't even need to speak.
mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("I don't know if this is really a spoiler, but just to be safe...

So the Valley of Elah is in Israel, and in the Bible is the valley in which David fought Goliath. Is the title simply symbolic of Jones' (the little guy) struggle to wrest truth from the big guy (government, military, whatever)? Or is there more meaning behind the title than that?

I haven't seen the movie, but I noticed "Elah" in my Bible and became curious.*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***

");document.close();
 
In the Valley of Elah

Liked this movie quite a bit. Some people might be annoyed with the director's "message" not being very subtle, but still worth a watch. I did feel that the ending lacked the punch that the rest of the movie was building up to - seemed to fizzle a little bit at the end.

On kind of a tangent here, but this is another example for me of :rolleyes: when I look at acting nominations for the AWs. I am pretty sure that Tommy Lee Jones is up for best actor, but he was exactly the same throughout the whole movie. Sure his character had a presence and you did feel for him, but there really wasn't much to him, IMO. Don't know why acting exactly the same throughout all the scenes warrants a best actor nod.
I think Jones is a fantastic actor, but certainly that's an understated role for him. If you put a mediocre actor in that spot, Jones' gifts do seem obvious. He seems to have a lot of subtext in his acting.
I thought he was terrific in the movie. He didn't even need to speak.
mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("I don't know if this is really a spoiler, but just to be safe...

So the Valley of Elah is in Israel, and in the Bible is the valley in which David fought Goliath. Is the title simply symbolic of Jones' (the little guy) struggle to wrest truth from the big guy (government, military, whatever)? Or is there more meaning behind the title than that?

I haven't seen the movie, but I noticed "Elah" in my Bible and became curious.*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***

");document.close();
Certainly. Here's another take:mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

Jones' son seems to succumb to the horrors of war, and does not triumph over evil. Which is a contrast to the story of David - where a young man defeats evil successfully.

*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

 
Saw The Mist last night. Slightly above-average horror flick that jumped up to a well-above average horror flick thanks to a good ending. I saw it coming, but not so far ahead that it ruined it for me.

 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
To be fair, a lot of that has to fall on the director's shoulders. I would that that any decent director would reign him in a little if that wasn't what they were going for in the movie/character. Judging by his other movies, I would say that PTA tends to toe the line of overboard for some of the characters in his movies. I guess we'll see in about 5 years when DDL pokes his head out and does another movie.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
To be fair, a lot of that has to fall on the director's shoulders. I would that that any decent director would reign him in a little if that wasn't what they were going for in the movie/character. Judging by his other movies, I would say that PTA tends to toe the line of overboard for some of the characters in his movies. I guess we'll see in about 5 years when DDL pokes his head out and does another movie.
I think PT Anderson is a fine director, but I wouldn't credit or blame him for Lewis' performance. I don't picture guys like Anderson and Scorsese giving Lewis a lot of direction regarding the tone of his performance. I think Lewis is the final decider for his own intensity.
 
Saw There Will be Blood. I agree that the story wasn't that great, but I can't agree that DDL's acting was overrated. He was pretty fantastic in the movie. The movie was also brilliantly shot. Unfortunately, it was basically just a character portrait and really didn't have that much going for it in terms of story and plot.
I just don't think that mimicking old speech patterns constitutes great acting.
DDL is the opposite of subtle, which I usually go for, but I think he's great. Hammy, emotive, maybe even an overactor, but brilliant.
He didn't used to be that way. Watch something like The Boxer or The Age of Innocence or even My Beautiful Laundrette.DDL didn't used to have constantly chew the scenery to disappear into a role. I've said it before. I fear that all the acclaim for his ridiculous, over the top turn in Gangs of New York was a bad omen.
To be fair, a lot of that has to fall on the director's shoulders. I would that that any decent director would reign him in a little if that wasn't what they were going for in the movie/character. Judging by his other movies, I would say that PTA tends to toe the line of overboard for some of the characters in his movies. I guess we'll see in about 5 years when DDL pokes his head out and does another movie.
I think PT Anderson is a fine director, but I wouldn't credit or blame him for Lewis' performance. I don't picture guys like Anderson and Scorsese giving Lewis a lot of direction regarding the tone of his performance. I think Lewis is the final decider for his own intensity.
Speaking of PT -- I know this has been discussed before but did y'all really like the TWBB score? I thought it was distracting.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top