The Criterion Collection

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by floor pie

If Stir Crazy is a step up for him, then oh boy, he must be one terrible director! I recently watched it on Prime, and it really suffers from what was mentioned earlier with the unfunny bits dragging on way too long. And apparently he even encouraged Pryor and Wilder to improvise, with horrifying results. The scene in the jail with Wilder acting insane was especially painful. Real thin soup.

Comedy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. One person finds a thing hysterically funny, another person finds the same thing terrible. Quite frankly, I tend to find most "modern" (i.e. 80s-present) comedies unfunny and unwatchable. But there are exceptions. Stir Crazy isn't one that would be at the top of my list of must-watch modern comedies, but it's definitely funnier and more enjoyable than most I've seen.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

As for Ryan O’Neal, I agree with the post above which cited THE DRIVER and BARRY LYNDON as his best performances. It takes just as much talent to play a seemingly emotionless enigma as any character loaded with depth and obvious (often too obvious) substance.

Funny you should say this. I recently experienced this with another actor: Jason Segel. I've been watching this TV series he created, wrote, and starred in called Dispatches from Elsewhere. Now, I've never liked nor disliked Segel in anything I've ever seen him in before. Peter, his character in this, is one that he seems to have been born to play: a dull, dispassionate, schlemiel who goes through the motions of life without ever being involved with it. It felt like he was using the opportunity here to write the perfect character for him to play. And he succeeds in spades.

As for the series, people seem to either love it or hate it. Me, I loved it.

[DimitriL]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I’m worried about Jon Mulvaney.

I emailed him three days ago to ask when the Zatoichi set might be back in stock and I haven’t heard back.

We’ve had our issues over the years, but aside from the restraining order he filed for, it was never personal.

I’m concerned.

Hopefully he’s safe and sound and locked down in his mother’s basement...binge-watching Tiger King and working on the newsletter clue for Weekend at Bernies.

I had a question for him a few weeks ago. It took three days to get a response, and then it was from someone named Arie. Was surprised to not hear directly from Jon.

[somethingblu]

Originally Posted by DaBargainHunta

Samuel Fuller's 1959 film The Crimson Kimono begins with a stripper being murdered. On stage, she portrayed a geisha, which was patterned after a painting she commissioned and had hanging up. The two cops assigned to the case - Joe Kojaku (James Shigeta) and Charlie Bancroft (Glenn Corbett) - are best friends and war veterans. Kojaku is of Japanese descent but was born and raised in the U.S. Their first step, of course, is to look for the painter that inspired the stripper's act. Finding and getting close the artist, Chris (Victoria Shaw), leads to its own set of complications...

The murder mystery element of the story is fairly pedestrian. Truthfully, the case they're investigating is almost beside the point. What the movie is really interested is in the relationships with the two detectives have - with each other, the beautiful painter helping them solve the murder, racial issues, and the country as it was at that time.

The Crimson Kimono was ahead of its time when it came out in the late-1950s, not only in its exploration of race and identity, but by casting actual Japanese actors in these roles instead of, say, putting Mickey Rooney in embarrassing yellowface.

DaBargainHunta's Decree: Like Chris's painting, something is missing that prevents it from becoming a "great movie" - but it is a good and unique one that's worth watching.

I saw this film as a love story between the two war buddies. From that view alone I found it very compelling and poignant. I think the murder mystery is really second-hand compared to the identity crisis of the Japanse-American on post-war Los Angeles. I didn't care so much now the murder mystery was resolved but cared more for the resolution of the human mystery.

[DaBargainHunta]

Originally Posted by somethingblu

I saw this film as a love story between the two war buddies. From that view alone I found it very compelling and poignant. I think the murder mystery is really second-hand compared to the identity crisis of the Japanse-American on post-war Los Angeles. I didn't care so much now the murder mystery was resolved but cared more for the resolution of the human mystery.

Great description of the movie! I feel the exact same way you do.

I watched the 1972 Jamaican movie The Harder They Come on The Criterion Channel last night and found it quite fascinating. If I decide to watch the director's other movie tonight, I'll post about both of them tomorrow. If not, I'll post my thoughts about this one separately.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I’m worried about Jon Mulvaney.

I emailed him three days ago to ask when the Zatoichi set might be back in stock and I haven’t heard back.

We’ve had our issues over the years, but aside from the restraining order he filed for, it was never personal.

I’m concerned.

Hopefully he’s safe and sound and locked down in his mother’s basement...binge-watching Tiger King and working on the newsletter clue for Weekend at Bernies.

Mulvaney is in lockdown and probably drinking so many Corona Extras, he's too busy passed out most of the time watching television reruns of Cheers.

[jayembee]

I just emailed him about a damaged disc that just arrived the other day. Haven't heard back yet, but we'll see when he replies.

[floor pie]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Comedy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. One person finds a thing hysterically funny, another person finds the same thing terrible. Quite frankly, I tend to find most "modern" (i.e. 80s-present) comedies unfunny and unwatchable. But there are exceptions. Stir Crazy isn't one that would be at the top of my list of must-watch modern comedies, but it's definitely funnier and more enjoyable than most I've seen.

Definite bottom of the barrel stuff for me, as far as that era is considered. Not that I actively seek out the worst comedies of the 70's and 80's.

I'm not much of a modern comedy fan either; although again I rarely watch them anyways. I will say that Wet Hot American Summer is probably one of the top 5 comedies ever made. Plus you have your Dodgeballs and what not which are very enjoyable.

Stuff like the puking bit in Knives Out seems to emblematic of the tone deafness / general hackiness that seems to be popular in Hollywood humor right now.

[DaBargainHunta]

Originally Posted by floor pie

I will say that Wet Hot American Summer is probably one of the top 5 comedies ever made.

Will eventually re-watch this, but my first reaction was, "That's it?" I liked the movie well enough, don't get me wrong, but I found it quite underwhelming overall.

No idea how it compares to Stir Crazy though, as I still haven't seen that one.

Stuff like the puking bit in Knives Out seems to emblematic of the tone deafness / general hackiness that seems to be popular in Hollywood humor right now.

Not sure the puking is intended to be comedic though. Rather, it's used as a way to establish the character's credibility with the audience because she can't tell a lie without vomiting afterward.

[yhzmr]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I think Cruise’s best performance by far is in MAGNOLIA, maybe because he was playing someone not so unlike himself? Otherwise, I’ve never been impressed with him as an ACTOR, not in the least. But as the strong, silent type in action thrillers, he’s very good and I think he’s finally found his niche. It’s no sin to have limited acting ability when the camera loves you. The history of film is loaded with such performers.

As for Ryan O’Neal, I agree with the post above which cited THE DRIVER and BARRY LYNDON as his best performances. It takes just as much talent to play a seemingly emotionless enigma as any character loaded with depth and obvious (often too obvious) substance.

Sure Tom Cruise is not in the same league as Daniel Day Lewis or Gary Oldman as in their ability to absolutely disappear into a role but the dedication to his craft is impressive. I've never seen him ever phone it in which some acclaimed actors like DeNiro have been known to do.

[DaBargainHunta]

I'll call Cruise underrated. Like the above poster said: Is he Daniel Day-Lewis? No. But I've never seen him give a bad performance either.

[mja345]

Re: Ryan O'Neal, he gives an excellent performance in the Blake Edwards' Western "Wild Rovers". He and William Holden both give wonderful, textured performances as two men who essentially have a father-son relationship. O'Neal's acting ability really suffered as his drug addiction worsened IMO and, by the mid-80s, he was a shell of his former self and was phoning in performances in films like "Fever Pitch" and "Tough Guys Don't Dance" (two unintentional comedy classics).

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by yhzmr

Sure Tom Cruise is not in the same league as Daniel Day Lewis or Gary Oldman as in their ability to absolutely disappear into a role but the dedication to his craft is impressive. I've never seen him ever phone it in which some acclaimed actors like DeNiro have been known to do.

I think that's very true. Cruise has always tried very hard and I do give him credit for that. Daniel Day Lewis is out and out terrific and I don't think has ever given a bad performance. I have great admiration for him, but really, he isn't a lot of fun and cinema should be about that at times too. Guys like John Wayne and Gary Cooper were never what might be called "classical" actors, but who cares? They are always entertaining and you rarely notice anyone else when they are in a scene.

Oldman has resorted to hamming it in recent years and without a doubt DeNiro has almost slummed himself into self parody. THE IRISHMAN proved he still has it in him to do more than just cash checks, but does he have anything else left up his sleeve? We'll see.

Brando remains a favorite of mine because he did just about everything. He mastered the craft so early on I think he felt unchallenged and started experimenting with every type of movie and performance. Then later on it seems like he gave up treating any of it seriously and became a lot like your goofy old uncle. When I read criticism of him it seems like acting snobs can't quite accept that he developed such an infectiously surreal sense of humor about acting. All the elitists who once revered him had no idea what to make of that. I can watch the guy in anything and have a good time, whether it's Shakespeare or Dr. Moreau.

[mja345]

Someone I've been watching a lot recently who is as good at disappearing into roles as anyone is Jennifer Jason Leigh. I've watched her in five films recently ("Dolores Claiborne", "Kansas City", "Single White Female", "Miami Blues", and "The Hudsucker Proxy") and her ability to disappear into roles is up there with DDL, Oldman, etc. The woman is a f*king amazing actress.

[yhzmr]

Do you think Oldman was hamming it up in Darkest Hour (2017)? I thought he was the embodiment of Churchill.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by yhzmr

Do you think Oldman was hamming it up in Darkest Hour (2017). I thought he was the embodiment of Churchill.

Gary Oldman doesn’t ham it up sir...ever.

...I resent the suggestion.

[Show spoiler]

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by yhzmr

Do you think Oldman was hamming it up in Darkest Hour (2017)? I thought he was the embodiment of Churchill.

No, not at all, he was magnificent in that role.

Obviously, I was generalizing as can happen in posts, but I certainly would never say it applies to EVERY film he's made in recent years. It's not always so easy to remember to qualify every statement in a post, especially when you have a lot to say, but are trying to avoid droning on in a long, nigh unreadable post.

Anyway, I agree with you about him in CHURCHILL, of course, and I liked the movie too, though the crummy CGI they used was totally unnecessary.

[rip63]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

No, not at all, he was magnificent in that role.

Obviously, I was generalizing as can happen in posts, but I certainly would never say it applies to EVERY film he's made in recent years. It's not always so easy to remember to qualify every statement in a post, especially when you have a lot to say, but are trying to avoid droning on in a long, nigh unreadable post.

Anyway, I agree with you about him in CHURCHILL, of course, and I liked the movie too, though the crummy CGI they used was totally unnecessary.

He was very far hamming it up in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy just a few years back. In fact, he completely underplayed it and got an Oscar nom.

[mja345]

I think Oldman, in the early 2000s, entered the stage where he started doing a lot of paycheck roles and occasionally mixes in a deeply committed performance. Most of Oldman's best work is early in his career. The string of performances he gave from the early 80s to mid 90s was pretty special ("Meantime", "Sid and Nancy", “The Firm”, "Track 29", “Prick Up Your Ears”, “State of Grace”, “JFK”, “Dracula”, “True Romance”, “Immortal Beloved” and "Leon" are all flat-out awesome performances). Now, he does a ton of paycheck roles and will occasionally turn in a great performance.

[jayembee]

Some roles call for chewing the scenery with gusto, and Oldman isn't one to shirk such a duty. I have a nephew who opined that he didn't like Maggie Smith because he thought she chewed the scenery. He was largely basing this on whichever of the Harry Potter movies he'd seen, and various clips he saw of scenes from Downton Abbey. And sure, she's great at chewing scenery when it's what the part needs, but she gives amazing deft performances when it's not. Oldman's the same way. I wouldn't base my opinion of his abilities based on seeing him in Air Force One or The Fifth Element, for examples.