Movie Reviews part 13: How many movies will Jessica Chastain star in?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Her 8.0/10 This was a little different than I expected. It does cover how people can enjoy their screens almost like a non-judgmental soundboard for their lives but it ended up being more than that.
I think this will ring true for people who've been through a divorce. People can often change and improve themselves and leave their partner's behind. People just have to accept that this is the case and move on. The ending may be selfish to some in the audience but it's often how people are. Also the ending may not fit everyone in the audience for their experience. I'm pretty sure some divorcees don't wish love to their former tormentors. Also some people don't improve but in fact get worse with their personality faults.
Ultimately it was really good but not quite the best picture of the year material. Still worth seeing once. I don't have a huge desire to see it again.
 
I saw Wolf of Wall Street and Her over the past couple of days. Really enjoyed both, Her especially. I thought the ending was lazy and disappointing but I loved Phoenix and found it visually crisp. A very thought provoking and well acted movie.

WOWS was definitely a Scorsese movie, though it didn't exactly look like one. The direction was pretty bland, not a terrific effort on his part. The meat of the film is the crazy madcap debauchery, which made for an entertaining 2 hour film. I'm not sure what the other hour was there for. Minimal character development did little to help matters. But I did have fun, a lot of fun. I'd take this over po-faced shit like Gangs any day, even if it only had like a half hour of story. The journey was the destination. Gotta love Leo trying to strangle Jonah Hill with a phone in slow motion.

But if Leo gets a legacy Oscar for this film, I will be disappointed. Especially after seeing Her yesterday.
 
Last edited:
If Leo does win, it won't be a "legacy" award. It will be because he's receiving the best notices of his career, with review upon review claiming it as his best work.

I don't agree it's his peak (that would be Shutter Island or The Departed for me), but I think it's in the top handful of performances this year.
 
They gave an award to someone who eats people. And someone who kills people with an air pressure cattle gun. And a guy who beats someone to death with a bowling pin. And I won't bother to list the crazy shit The Joker did.

So...who knows.
 
lazarus said:
If Leo does win, it won't be a "legacy" award. It will be because he's receiving the best notices of his career, with review upon review claiming it as his best work.

I don't agree it's his peak (that would be Shutter Island or The Departed for me), but I think it's in the top handful of performances this year.
Click to expand...

Shutter Island may be my favorite of his stretch of manic, strained serious-type roles. Seeing him let loose and command as this bullshit artist for 3 hours puts it over the top for me. The range of emotion and motivation on display is totally bonkers.
 
I'd say Wolf is easily his best performance. Demands the most range at least, and while he doesn't hit ever register with the same skill, it all works on some level, and when he's at his best here, hot damn.

Also, bland direction? What are you even talking about?
 
I would. I felt like I've seen that movie multiple times now. Twice this year, in fact, thanks to Russell's send-up.

That run time did the film no favors, either.... But, none of this should surprise anyone, I'm not exactly the guy's biggest fan.
 
Well count me out of the camp that needs a filmmaker to add/try new things in his repertoire with any new film to be more worthy of interest.
 
That's not what I said, but when you can predict what exactly is going to happen for the first 15 or 20 minutes of a movie, don't you think that's kind of a problem?
 
lazarus said:
They gave an award to someone who eats people. And someone who kills people with an air pressure cattle gun. And a guy who beats someone to death with a bowling pin.
Click to expand...

I'm pretending this is all the same person and I really want to see that movie.
 
I know it's not what you said, but a reaction to something I see a lot. Also to your question, no not really.

Also that would be a structural issue of the script first and foremost.
 
That's cool. To each their own, and all that. I didn't dislike the movie, Marty's obviously incredibly talented and as much as I say I don't "like" him, I think I've still given every movie of his I've seen at least a 7/10. Like is a relative word.
 
Well sure. Honestly, yeah the major arc of the film is 100% familiar, but that doesn't bother me when the actual textures and meat of the film are so lively and satisfying i.e. character performances, editing (which actually shares less with Marty's most comparable works than other things), the richness and humor of individual scenes, the little ideas that dot the major themes. It's nice when a film is surprising, but it's hardly necessary. Certainly a more enjoyable film overall for me than Goodfellas or Casino (though I really like the latter), if not nearly as innovative or stylized as its forebears.
 
Lancemc said:
Well sure. Honestly, yeah the major arc of the film is 100% familiar, but that doesn't bother me when the actual textures and meat of the film are so lively and satisfying i.e. character performances, editing (which actually shares less with Marty's most comparable works than other things), the richness and humor of individual scenes, the little ideas that dot the major themes. It's nice when a film is surprising, but it's hardly necessary. Certainly a more enjoyable film overall for me than Goodfellas or Casino (though I really like the latter), if not nearly as innovative or stylized as its forebears.
Click to expand...

Besides us disagreeing on GoodFellas, we're on the same page.

Jordan's narration shifting in and out of past and present tense and barely out of his POV is pretty astonishing. There's the one scene at the end of GoodFellas where Henry speaks to the camera in the courthouse scene, but that follows a linear path at least.

Looking at Wolf as an extension of GoodFellas/Casino -- and sure as hell not in relation to Hustle -- doesn't reduce it unnecessarily.
 
I'd never even say Goodfellas is a lesser or poor film or anything either, I just don't care about it.
 
Lancemc said:
I'd never even say Goodfellas is a lesser or poor film or anything either, I just don't care about it.
Click to expand...

For sure, and I wasn't saying that you were. I love it. That being said, I think your perspective is valuable since it's not entirely hinging your take on it off of that movie, which seems to be the consensus.
 
Right. And while the piece I read saying Wolf was closer to something like After Hours or The King of Comedy than anything else in Marty's oeuvre might not be entirely on point, I do think Wolf functions best in a different line consideration from his gangster films. It's more interesting to me, at least, to view it as the natural continuation of his DiCaprio collabs, which all have their own distinct point of view and sense of experimentation to degrees.
 
Lancemc said:
I'd say Wolf is easily his best performance. Demands the most range at least
Click to expand...

What range? He plays the same coke-addled asshole for 95% of a three hour film. The 20 minutes of vaguely contrite kingpin broken by the Man has been done more convincingly by other actors in previous Scorsese films because the writing allowed for it. I get that his performance is infectious, and I agree that it is, but I wouldn't use range as an argument for its superiority. It was numbing, if anything.

And personally, I thought unhinged Leo was more unsettling and affecting in small doses via Django Unchained.
 
Last edited:
Lancemc said:
Right. And while the piece I read saying Wolf was closer to something like After Hours or The King of Comedy than anything else in Marty's oeuvre might not be entirely on point, I do think Wolf functions best in a different line consideration from his gangster films. It's more interesting to me, at least, to view it as the natural continuation of his DiCaprio collabs, which all have their own distinct point of view and sense of experimentation to degrees.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take. I see it as a fusion of that gangster line with the DiCap Decade. Taking chronologically, GoodFellas focuses on greed/paranoia in the middle-class; Casino is a rise & fall of the Roman Empire story subbing in organized crime; Wolf is what happens when greed in its purest form becomes an institution in and of itself. If they all can be taken as referendums of addiction, then the highs reach greater peaks over time.

The DiCap pictures show a flip-side to that addiction, moving full-on into portrayals of obsession -- and personal reinvention through that obsession. Amsterdam is consumed by his vengeance for Bill the Butcher; Hughes' OCD overtakes his quest for perfection; Billy trades his life & persona for a shot at reforming his own past; Teddy can't shake his past (avoiding spoilers); Jordan wants everything, all of the time, with candles firmly lodged in his ass.

Jordan reminds me of Don Draper in that they're both self-made men who are limited by their own imagination. Draper has a soul though.
 
Don't confuse the range of a character's personality with the range required of the actor to pull it off. He has to pull off a lot of different things to make this particular coke-addled asshole come to life - convincingly suave, cock-sure but unconvincingly suave, delusionally earnest, sincerely earnest, the self-aware criminally indulgent vein of Scorsese-film De Niro/Liotta, Jerry Lewis-esque pure mad-cap physical comedy, to yes, the deflated broken man. It's all one fairly linear character portrayal, but the amount of nuance he has to pull to make it convincing and more importantly entertaining is pretty great, and I'm thrilled to see him recognized for it. It's far more impressive then his tortured-guy Departed role, and even a bit moreso than Shutter Island which was easily his impassioned performance before now.

I would have loved to see more of him in Django Unchained, as he's really the only part of that film that works, but maybe it's because he's only in small doses. And yeah he's more unsettling there, but again he's not really doing much, though the fact he broke his own star persona so thoroughly for that role speaks volumes.
 
LMP said:
That's an interesting take. I see it as a fusion of that gangster line with the DiCap Decade. Taking chronologically, GoodFellas focuses on greed/paranoia in the middle-class; Casino is a rise & fall of the Roman Empire story subbing in organized crime; Wolf is what happens when greed in its purest form becomes an institution in and of itself. If they all can be taken as referendums of addiction, then the highs reach greater peaks over time.

The DiCap pictures show a flip-side to that addiction, moving full-on into portrayals of obsession -- and personal reinvention through that obsession. Amsterdam is consumed by his vengeance for Bill the Butcher; Hughes' OCD overtakes his quest for perfection; Billy trades his life & persona for a shot at reforming his own past; Teddy can't shake his past (avoiding spoilers); Jordan wants everything, all of the time, with candles firmly lodged in his ass.

Jordan reminds me of Don Draper in that they're both self-made men who are limited by their own imagination. Draper has a soul though.
Click to expand...

For sure. The DiCaprio films follow similar arcs in a way, but they're much more psychological versus institutional, which I think reflects the work of an artist growing from his rebellious early stages to a later-career phase. Though that might be generalizing a bit without much foundation.
 
Lancemc said:
For sure. The DiCaprio films follow similar arcs in a way, but they're much more psychological versus institutional, which I think reflects the work of an artist growing from his rebellious early stages to a later-career phase. Though that might be generalizing a bit without much foundation.
Click to expand...

It fits perfectly with Scorsese just going balls out as a venerable studio director now, riffing on different eras/influences because he can fucking do that now.
 
Lancemc said:
Don't confuse the range of a character's personality with the range required of the actor to pull it off. He has to pull off a lot of different things to make this particular coke-addled asshole come to life - convincingly suave, cock-sure but unconvincingly suave, delusionally earnest, sincerely earnest, the self-aware criminally indulgent vein of Scorsese-film De Niro/Liotta, Jerry Lewis-esque pure mad-cap physical comedy, to yes, the deflated broken man. It's all one fairly linear character portrayal, but the amount of nuance he has to pull to make it convincing and more importantly entertaining is pretty great, and I'm thrilled to see him recognized for it. It's far more impressive then his tortured-guy Departed role, and even a bit moreso than Shutter Island which was easily his impassioned performance before now.

I would have loved to see more of him in Django Unchained, as he's really the only part of that film that works, but maybe it's because he's only in small doses. And yeah he's more unsettling there, but again he's not really doing much, though the fact he broke his own star persona so thoroughly for that role speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of this ties into what we were discussing earlier; novelty gets a great deal of credit. I've seen this character arc so many times by this point that it can difficult to appreciate when it's done well. Or, in my case, elevate it above the pack. Familiarity can be a negative when it comes to acclaim, if not the visceral impact of a film. Django is set apart in my mind because it was such a unique turn for him.
 
Speaking of Scorsese, seeing a print of Raging Bull tonight 'cause I'VE GOT NO CHOIIICE.
 
BRING IT OVAHHH!!

Great discussion today, guys. Not much to add as I'm driving, but in other Marty news, I'm fairly repulsed that Adam Driver is in talks to join the cast of Silence. Really don't understand the hype over this guy, and I find him unpleasant to look at/listen to, despite his briefly amusing turn in Llewyn Davis.
 
Probably doesn't belong here, but there are three big Scorsese films I haven't seen yet: King of Comedy, Age of Innocence and Last Temptation of Christ. Any particular favorites out of these?
 
Both Innocence and Temptation are masterpieces. Comedy is also great just not nearly as ambitious as the others. Really you see it for the De Niro performance.

Of the three I'd say Innocence is the best, and his most moving film. Might not be your cup of tea though. Temptation has the East coast sensibility of earlier works but on a larger canvas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bono_212
ZS Movie Release Calendar
Replies
8
Views
904
bono_212
bono_212
EdgeIsTooSexy
The Edge of Reason
Replies
13
Views
2K
Xantric
X
Sherry Darling
Dave Barry's Year in Review
Replies
8
Views
408
~*Buffalo*~
B
Niamh_Saoirse
2003 predictions in full - U2 related
Replies
8
Views
1K
DML
DML

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom