 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.234.223.159
In Reply to: RE: "Brothers:" the original one by Susanne Bier, is another lacerating emotional posted by tinear on December 16, 2009 at 09:14:39
That's a remarkable statement.
Garret Dillahunt, Mark Ruffolo, Jeffery Wright, Ryan Gosling, Emil Hirsch, Catherine Keener, Laura Linney, Joan Allen, Francis McDormand, Jennifer Connoley, Chris Cooper, Phillip Seymour Hoffman.............hell, George Clooney is a fine and versatile actor.............
If I had 30 more seconds I could easily double the list.
Bier is exceptional; After The Wedding is exceptional. Brothers is........uhmmmmm...........adequate. Connie Nielson is the best thing in it.
Follow Ups:
.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
.
but after the initial shooting he said it could have only been Thomsen. The Scando's know their way around scripting and shooting.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
very different from great acting. Hirsch has no gravitas, no weight. Compare him to Kaas. No comparison. If they were boxers, H would be a welterweight and Kaas a heavyweight.
Disagreement, which is healthy, on "Brothers." I found it very good. It's very difficult to deal with the deepest of emotional issues, which Bier consistently does, and not degenerate into maudlin melodrama.
I'd say Sean Penn is a good American actor but, for some time, he's suffered a bit from "Pacinoitis." Gosling? One good role as that addicted public school teacher so it's a bit early to say. That, as I recall, was very good. But he seems.... boyish. That's my major gripe with young American actors (Clooney doesn't fit the argument, nor does Keener). Depp, Pitt, Hirsch, Gosling, Maguire, Gyllendall, Afflack (the younger) all look like boy-men.
...he was one of your favorites. You did praise him in Into The Wild, after all.What do "personalities" have to do with acting? Isn't acting a transcendence of "personality?
Do you really say that there has been no "greatness" from Wright. Dillahunt, Hoffman, Allen, Linney, McDormand, et al? And that was my 30 second list.
If you now further qualify your statement to try to force me to find American plug-ins for the roles in Brothers then I'll have to dig deeper, I guess, but that wasn't the way you couched it originally. It's so outrageous I won't even repeat it. ;-)
There are many fine American actors. Male and female. Boyish men and otherwise. What's missing is the fine roles.
"If they were boxers.........". That's hilarious. OK, Ruffalo v. Kaas, how about that manly comparison? Jeremy Renner?
Watching all that football has your blood running high.
Gravitas is a contextual thing. Can a man or woman carry a movie? Inhabit a role? That's gravitas. Not who has more hair on his chest.
The problem is that Hollywood "got small". The problem is the larger American film industry trying to read and Pablum-feed several (movie-going) generations of lowest common denominator taste, on the cheap. It is a bad(ish) time for American film; not necessarily American actors.
I saw Brothers about a year ago. Compared to 50 better films - including some American ones - I saw on either side of it, I still consider it "adequate". About 3.0 out of 5. There's really very little that elevates it as a stand alone movie. I doubt you'd have the same feeling absent it's association to After The Wedding. Would you now list it among your "Best of The Decade", replacing one you've already chosen?
That's an interesting question. Which one of your "Best of The Naughties" would you replace with Brothers?
I like Ulrich Thomsen. He's somewhat formulaic and one-noteish to me. I liked him better in both The Inheritance and in The Celebration, for example. Still, in all his roles I've seen, he comes across the big brother, elder son, brave and loyal husband type. Little character or versatility beyond the typical, classical leading man persona. A tad milquetoasty. The cool, strong but slightly reticent Scandinavian. He was not convincing as the combat officer or in the rage of a betrayed husband. Actorly, little more.
You establish "greatness" for Kaas on the basis of this one role yet you poo-poo Gosling for your single mention of his "greatness". Compare further their bodies of work, notwithstanding their "manliness". Or Kaas against any of the others I mention.
If Thomsen and Kaas and Connie Nielson were world-class actors the world would better know them. I know them and I still disagree that each is better than ALL OTHER American actors. Nor are they in the pantheon of countless, great non-American actors well-known here.
Could any of the three carry a good American film? I seriously question so.
I say good film is good film. Who cares where it comes from? Or who is in it? Good(ness) in one case doesn't necessarily remind me of its absence in another.
Bier, as good as she has shown so far, has to branch out a little as far as I'm concerned before she can be considered in the company of the best from America, Japan, Korea, China, France, Italy, Australia, etc. When she does a manly film I'll think more of her. LOL.
As always, your taste and comments are more good than not. ;-). Always stimulating and enjoyable.
Edits: 12/16/09 12/16/09
"Hirsch is okay but in many scenes he proved he is a superb mimic. Leonardo-lite. The grin. The vocal inflection. In one scene, poorly lit, he even looked exactly like him, filmed from the side.
Anyhow, if you'd like to spend a few very long hours (couldn't we have done with a bit less of those repetitive Keener scenes?) this could be your film.
Two 1/2 stars (out of five). "
to carry it further to "all."
"Brothers" I didn't feel was great, but very good. An actor has a persona, a natural aura and earthiness, which are possessed in different measures. Hollywood has taken to promoting boyish actors. It's a fact. From Tom Cruise forward, strong, powerful leading men just don't seem to appear. Nicholas Cage is the exception, but Nic is ironic in most of his roles.
We must disagree about Thomsen. He is in the "less is more" Scandinavian emotional tradition, like Max von Sydow. I don't feel shifting eyes nervously, inventing facial movements, squinting, and the other common tricks of American film actors particularly are interesting. Most Europeans eschew such exaggerations.
Anyhow, I don't think "Brothers" or "Open Hearts" are classic cinema or "Best of Decade" but I do think they're both very good, that the performances are magnificent, and that Bier should be rated a tad higher than you think because of her subject matter: it's harder to deal with topics NO one likes to think about; there is a built-in hostility to having someone make us look at such brutality, cruelty which is visited in "common" life as opposed to the rather unbelievable stuff that happens in the horror, thriller genres.
There also is the vast chasm of melodrama which Bier must side-step, no mean accomplishment.
In the end, we can't agree very much. Robert Downey, Jr., Johnny Depp, Clooney, Pitt all have personalities which they cannot transcend for their roles, i.e. they aren't good enough actors. To take one rather extreme example of an American actor with a larger-than-life personality that could: Marlon Brando. He had the character actor's ability to leave himself behind.
All the Danes you mentioned in Brothers are 35+ years old. There's a long list of Americans 30-50 years old who are accomplished film ( and stage) actors.
I gave you a starter list but you keep bringing up the "pop" stars. Address Wright, Ruffulo, Dillahunt, Linney, Hoffman, Keener, Renner, etc.
Maybe you were just being dramatic and twitchy-faced yourself when you said you didn't think there was one U.S. actor to match them. ;-)
I'm in agreement with much of what you say about the state of American cinema. But to make such a statement about the quality of a broad swath of actors flies in the face of a lofty film wisdom and insight that you otherwise work so hard to project.
And, Thomsen ain't no Sydow.
I base my opinions upon when in their 20s.
"Wright, Ruffulo, Dillahunt, Linney, Hoffman, Keener, Renner, etc. "
None of these are really leading actors, with the exception of Hoffman who plays mostly quirky, zany characters. Linney I think is static. Keener is the real deal but she doesn't seem to get very many roles in very good films.
You're kind of playing a little unfairly here, as well. I mentioned all the most well-known American actors that star in 99% of the films. You pick the character actor types that only get the minor films, the indies which is a far cry from the Danish actors.
Powerful, non-kooky American male leads just don't seem to exist (Dillahunt...... for Christ's sake!)
I look back a generation and I see plenty of strong American lead actors. If you haven't noticed a drastic change to the adolescent, you aren't paying attention.
...with exception of Dillahunt have been leads in many films. You know that; why say otherwise. Be honest.Linney is "static".... what does that mean?
Now, tell me the lead actors, in wide distribution, you're referring to, beyond the oldsters, in Brothers.
Acting is acting, whether quirky or otherwise. Dillahunt is smart, articulate, well-trained and serious about his career. How pompous of you to imply otherwise. Again, maybe you just don't know better.
In the case of Kaas, how much of a stretch is it for an "angry" young man to play ............... an angry young man?
If the Danes are so exceptionally talented why aren't they active in a more worldly sense. The best in the world, regardless of nationality want to come NY or Hollywood. Where are the Danes? How many Danes have parts, much less leads, outside Denmark? Name them.
Big fish; little pond.
Edits: 12/17/09
..I'm still focused on your original statement. You're continuing to move the goal posts it seems to me, continuing to expand and qualify the the standards for discussion. Not worth trying to keep up.May as well talk about them Ducks or Gophers. Something manly or boxerly.
What a meaningless line of argument that the Danes were younger then.........so were the Americans. Compare bodies of work anywhere in time of the six you mentioned v. the half dozen or so I mentioned in my 30 second list. Including Dillahunt. Do it or yield.
Next you'll be talking relative percentages of total national population from which the groups came.
Like I've said in the past, it sometimes seems the case that you claim a film or actor becomes better simply by virtue of your attention.
You're mostly wise and insightful about cinema; in this case you're full of yourself and way off the mark.
PPffftttt! LOL.
Edits: 12/17/09
teen actors, can one?
So, a discussion of "young" actors would center on work in the twenties, early thirties. I merely pointed out that the Danes did lots of good stuff in their twenties.
As for moving goal posts, you're being really unfair. You misread my original post which was "YOUNG ACTORS." For the sake of discussion, I soldiered on. You completely ignore my points about leading vs. quirky character actors, which is central. You want to compare Dellahunt or Kenner to.... Kaas or Thomsen? Get serious, really. Look at the résumés. Third-billing vs. top billing.
And my larger point is the juvenalization of American films. It is geared to teenagers and the lead actors that have come up during this time all look.... teen-agey. Cutesie. Downey's grin. Pitt's wide-as-a-canyon smile and dimples.
No cutesie in Denmark (or Iran, French, Italian, Korean, et al) films.
You like cutesie, don't be bashful.
I don't.
...original points.Cutsie? I have no idea what you're talking about nor do you with that reference. Nowhere in my remarks here or elsewhere can you find traction for it. And I think you know better. Nasty little foul.
I watch as many films as you do and 95% of them are ex-U.S. I took up defense of Hollywood types simply to point out the excessiveness of your claim: "Where are the talented young actors in this country and why has Denmark become such a treasure trove of superb acting? I don't think we have one actor the match of any of these six."
In a 30 second sweep of my memory I named a number of American contemporaries of equal talent and accomplishment, at least. Then your dancing started.
What is the superb Danish acting treasure trove you refer to? The one that stands apart in comparison to the youngsters from Hollywood. Name them.
And, honestly, do you really want to stand by that last sentence, which, contrary to your continued revisionism, includes several elders.
Watch What Doesn't Kill You, with Ruffalo and a "young" American cast. It mines a very similar emotional territory as Brothers and is every bit the quality of film and performances.
If I thought it would be appreciated I'd name others worthy of inclusion in an earnest discussion of this matter, filling an obvious gap in your knowledge. I prefer, however, to do more than "soldier" on.
Edits: 12/17/09
are you purposefully being recalcitrant?
And you continue to be unfair, afilado my friend. I SPECIFICALLY specified the six actors I mentioned as being unmatched by American actors. You replied by listing a bunch of American supporting actors or leads that have made their living playing quirky/edgy, i.e. Hoffman, Keener.
I continue to smack your softballs over the fence and it is you who then change the subject or construct yet another straw man.
Danish film in the 90s was very fine, indeed. It carried on, somewhat, in the early 2000s but now seems to be in decline, as the Danes themselves now are scrambling to right what many feel is a listing national film association.
American actors are at a great disadvantage. They attend schools where a certain type of acting is taught. There is very little avant garde stage work to destroy the old and usher in a fresher acting style. So, we get mannerisms now legitimized for generations. I can't stand it.
Your need for being right, for winning (hitting "softballs" indeed) makes you less interesting.
I was hoping you'd rise above that faulty misspeak or be more entertaining and creative in recovery. Now you're just repeating yourself, becoming small and competitive in dull displays of scholarship.
You showed me nothing new.
Soldier on elsewhere.
:-)
.
pierced, tat-tagged women but what the hell!
"You're continuing to move the goal posts it seems to me, continuing to expand and qualify the the standards for discussion. "
Nothing against him but that's Tin's M.O. to a T.
"The man is only half himself, the other half is his expression." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Hollywood types because you eat at their trough.
Where I did defend any Hollywood types? I just pointed out that afilado's observation/assessment was right on.
"The man is only half himself, the other half is his expression." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Edits: 12/17/09
bring it up out there.
Kind of like a guy getting heat-butted in a bar and rising up in church to whine.
I don't have an outside issue...I was merely supporting the truth of afilado's observation.
"The man is only half himself, the other half is his expression." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
but you're at the wrong end, it's your head that's in the sand.
Freeman, all of whom I'd argue are powerful actors who possess not a whit of boyishness but project a strength which, to pick on him again, Robert Downey, Jr. never will. Downey may have all the acting chops in the world but he still doesn't have "it."
An example: Johnny Depp attempting to portray Dillinger. What a hoot that was.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
