 
|
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 |
108.81.116.219
This thing is more perfect than I caught the first time. The soundtrack, especially the single trap set, is superb and fitting. The flow of the camera basically imitates a single shot a'la 'Russian Ark'. Very, very clever editing and CGI to meld all of it together. Noticed there is a bit more Michael Keaton in it than the first. Some many actors cannot rid themselves of their ticks (worst-Natalie Portman).
For the staging, editing, soundtrack, and acting, I say Oskies all around a second time. PS. Norton stole the movie just like the story.
Follow Ups:
"Michael Keaton Is the Sole Redeeming Thing About ‘Birdman,’ Which Isn’t Saying Much"
Read more at http://observer.com/2014/10/michael-keaton-is-the-sole-redeeming-thing-about-birdman-which-isnt-saying-much/#ixzz3Kb3TKlz1
...I didn't know he was still alive much less still reviewing.
Among other things, he trashes Ed Norton, who most say will be up for a supporting Oscar, as embarrassing himself.
I think Reed is the one who should be embarrassed.
...and thought it was really brilliant.
It was very creative, different, superbly acted, uniquely filmed and scored with an interesting story.
Predict it will be up for Best Picture, Actor and Supporting Actor.
But however terrific the intellectual exercise is, I don't feel like it connected or resonated on much of an emotional level.
The characters are all kind of pathetic and I didn't care much about any of them - I felt a little sorry for Emma Stone but that's about it.
It did give us a lot to talk about after the show.
4 out of 5 stars.
Did their narcissism and lack of empathy for each other prevent us from caring for them??? Was it intentional??? Is every actor an island???
I have wondered are they really that smart??? Or am I giving them too much credit???
These questions and many more I do not have the answers too...
Glad you liked...4 or 5 is a good assessment...
Thanks
Mark
Ps. I am just happy I saw a movie, that made me ask questions...it has been awhile...
...what did you make of the last scene?
He was finally FREE. It was a great ending to me. Of course, if I had been given that nose I would have probably plunged to the sidewalk.
...that didn't look like the nose of someone who shot off his nose.I thought all of the psychokinetics, flying and whenever he was in his birdman suite were his mind - fantasies/delusions, mostly driven by alcohol.
So I thought he actually killed himself on stage and the last delusion he had was the hospital room scene.
Yes, he was finally free.
Edits: 11/24/14
You might be on to something. The ending was at least ambiguous. If he had only succeeded in shooting his nose off, he would have either bled to death on stage or would have been screaming in agony. The comment by his wife ex-wife that she never saw him so relaxed while he was waiting to go on for the first real performance was perhaps intended to highlight that he had in fact decided to kill himself and that decision released him from his depression and guilt and freed him. The gun looked real and the clip he put in the gun appeared to have live ammo in it. Not the red blood fake bullets lhe other gun had in it.
I thought the gun was real...and I thought he was dead...I was surprised by the hospital scene AND that he still HAD a nose to bandage...but by the end of the movie the suspension of disbelief had been smashed and left me going just HHHHhhhhhmmmmm...
The ambiguity and fantasy elements are part of what makes this movie special...
Thanks
Mark
I thought he was back to reality...and the nose bandage, ironically, made him look the persona he was trying to kill...the Birdman...as this was all that was left...hence free...
thanks
Mark
The bandaging screamed Bird Man. Perhaps stripping it off showed him the ugliness of his ways that forced him to escape this life. Emma may have seen his magnificent spirit soaring. Or maybe the sumbitch was really flying.
"For the staging, editing, soundtrack, and acting, I say Oskies all around a second time. PS. Norton stole the movie just like the story"
Staging...how they blocked this thing is just a mystery...there is no room for the camera...
Editing...what editing??!!?? One long tracking shot, don't quite know how they pulled that off but they did...very cool...
Soundtrack...yes that small trap set, that does not stay panned straight up, moves around to make room for whatever is going on, which they give you a peak at...drums make the fantasy elements, less extraordinary and less distracting...they do not highlight them at all...
Acting...the casting of Keaton was curious...Was he chosen because of the parallels of his career???
Emma Stone...I just never really know what to think of her, still on the fence...
Watts...is getting better...St Vincent was a better performance...
Zach G, I have seen this before from him...but solid...
Andrea Riseborough...the only thing I can remember in was Oblivion, she was interesting watch...
Amy Ryan as the NYT Theatre Critic, small role, BUT she captures that NYC "we are sooo much smarter and cooler than the rest of the world"...
Norton...this was so in his wheel house...surprising what good writing can to for an actors performance...he had this character at his core, played with it, flaunted it, he was having so much fun I thought he might burst...really great to watch...(was he tweaking Marvel for not casting him as the Hulk in the Avengers???)
The star of this movie was...Emmanuel Lubezki...the way this was shot, made this movie...if he does not win the Oscar for this something is wrong...
The "birdman", using Keaton's Batman voice, was a big part of the fun...I was waiting through the whole movie for reality to creep in and the potential of gravity rearing up...are we trained to wait for bad things to happen???
It does drag ever so slightly at times, but not for long...
Taking a sledgehammer to the superhero genre, slapping you upside the head with type casting, showing the neurotic narcissism of the theatre on all levels...are just a few of things that make this movie...
This does deserve a second viewing...
thanks
Mark
About Keaton:
I'd heard that when you asked him to play the part, his reply was…
"Is this a joke? Are you making fun of me?" Yeah, something along those lines. Then I explained to him why I was asking him to play the part, and he understood I was serious after about five minutes. I told him about how challenging it would be and he said, "Yeah, yeah. let's do this, it sounds great. I'm in." [Pause] I don't think he knew what he getting into, frankly. I think he was a little drunk. We drank a really good bottle of wine that night [laughs].
About Norton:
Edward Norton plays a Method-y actor who thrives on chaos and being difficult. Is his character based on anybody specific?
I won't tell you whom, but yes, he's based on several real people — including Edward Norton.
Good read . .
Good read...
When I left the theatre, the first thing that jumped into head, was this feels like Jazz...lots of room with constraints...
I also thought that Norton was poking fun at himself...but he did not write the material...so he was a gamer in that sense...
thanks
Mark
Even watching the interviews and clips makes me want to see this again...
The first watch, starts the simmering process, where it needs another viewing...
Thanks again for the additional insights...
very cool
Mark
Making of . .
Ahh.... one the things that cinematographers constantly plaigerize.
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 ]
