Showing posts with label Joaquin Pheonix. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joaquin Pheonix. Show all posts

Saturday, July 29, 2023

Bottom Ten Films of 2023 To Date




 10. Book Club Chapter 2-It’s another edition of “hey, Old people are exciting too!” I wonder if someone like Jane Fonda who has 2 Oscars and 5 additional nominations looks down on co-stars like Lily Tomlin or Don Johnson who have zero. Anywho, there’s not much to cover here: A bunch of old people having fun and negotiation late-stage romance and friendship. And a decent amount of scenery porn. Also, Mary Steenburgen playing the accordion (again).

9. White Men Can’t Jump-Jack Harlow didn’t convince me that he could jump. I’m not sure if he was slacking off with the training for the role, or I don’t know my basketball, but I wasn’t particularly convinced with the action here. Or maybe white men can’t jump. I was kind of expecting a more racially woke take on the original, but planned on watching anyway for nostalgic purposes. I was pleasantly surprised that the film doesn’t avoid edgy dialogue and doesn’t subdue one story in service to lionization of the Black character. Still, it wasn’t as exciting as it appeared to have been on paper.

8. Super Mario Brothers- This animated movie isn’t just a filmic homage to the Super Mario Brothers game you grew up with as a kid; it’s hodgepodge of every video game with the Super Mario label. Kind of like Ready Player One except there’s thematic consistency. And that nostalgia factor lights a bulb in your brain. And talk about that score! It’s almost worth the price of admission to see the most memorable tunes of the early 90s outside of the Billboard top 40, to be put to orchestration. As for the story, it’s pretty typical but not lazy enough (from an adult perspective) to have made a negative viewing experience for me.

7. Missing-A moderately clever thriller for the zoom age. Wish I had more to say.
6. No Hard Feelings-Basically, Lauren Benanti and Matthew Broderick hire a cash-strapped Jennifer Lawrence as a prostitute for their son, but Jennifer Lawrence doesn't consider herself a whore so it's not so bad. The kid is supposedly really awkward and insular (it turns out he has trauama), but then again he has at least two friends and he's going to Princeton where being a socially awkward genius is probably seen as a plus. Jennifer tries to sex him up as fast as possible so she can cash in, but hilarious misunderstandings (like an old friend wanting to have sex with him, which would solve his parents' problem) get in the way. Along the way, they become friends (aww, how cute) even though she's charging at him like a bull in heat. Then he finds out she was paid off, and has sex with her anyway (clumsily, is that supposed to be funny) while also destroying her car (taking away any semblance of him as a noble character), but then they heal each other's wounds (I think?).
Almost nothing in the plot holds up, but you get the idea that it's not supposed to: It's about the R-rated raunch but all that means is that Jennifer Lawrence is naked a little (I guess Seth MacFarlane can claim victory in the 2012 Oscars) but it doesn't leave that level of no-holds-barred usurping of appropriateness like Bridesmaids or The Hangover. If you're not going to do that, try building a better plot next time.
5. Elemental-Three main thoughts: 1) The level of world-building and visual imagination deserves great credit. 2) The love story is really sappy and overwrought 3) Is Pixar under so much pressure to be diverse that they’re afraid to cast a white person in what is clearly a metaphor for interracial romance?
4. True Spirit-It’s an inspiring adventure/sports story of someone who did something that people said she couldn’t. And it’s a teenager. And it stares an Oscar winner in Anna Paquin. But extremely snooze-worthy.
3. Beau is Afraid-The film’s marketing describes the movie as about a lonely man’s odyssey home, and the director described it as a “nightmare comedy” on press tours. I would classify it as the kind of ride that amusement park’s convert into a haunt-fest for Halloween. Only it lasts three hours, and it was seemingly co-written by Carl Jung and Franz Kafka for maximum symbolism. Joaquin Phoenix plays a lonely man who’s ill-at-ease with the world. It’s kind of justified, however, because, he seems to live among the worst possible humans alive. It’s disturbing but not tremendously far away from working.
2. Ghosted-It might have been less this film, than where I was this genre in general—action hero casually murders tons of people while being immune from even a single bullet—that colored my opinion. It’s a good turn for Ana de Armas.
1. Asterisk and Obelisk-Sure, there are works that are kid-oriented but there should be some appeal to an adult audience in terms of presenting a good story. I can appreciate that it was adapted from a comic book, but the film had a weird and off-putting ascetic. The fight scenes were just plain lazy.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Are stars obsolete?

I saw this article on time.com about how the movie star era is ending because reliable stars like Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, and Tom Cruise didn't gross a lot of money for Lions for Lambs and neither did Julia Roberts and Tom Hanks.
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1720049_1720050_1721687,00.html

The article claims that since Charlie Wilson's War and Lions for Lambs did not do well that we are no longer in an age of stars and people gravitate towards story lines now. I disagree with Corliss' notion that anything has changed much at all. Take his examples: Lions for Lambs starred Meryl Streep, Robert Redford, and Tom Cruise which I don't consider a good combination of star power to begin with for the time the picture was released.
-Cruise, although I don't say this with any sense of joy, was already going downhill in terms of reputation.
-Streep is in 3-4 films a year which dilutes her star power significantly. It's hard for the public to tell which of the many, many films she's in are worth going to whether it's Evening, Redacted, or Lions for Lambs. In 2004, Manchurian Candidate didn't do particularly well but Lemony Snicket did because Lemony Snicket was a better use of her star power.
-Redford hasn't really been a big star since the 1970's and early '80's. Today's teens and 20-year-olds are going to have to practically be film historians to remember the heyday of Robert Redford and get all worked up about it.

As for Charlie Wilson's War, that film didn't do particularly poorly. It grossed a respectable $66 million dollars and is enjoying a surprisingly long run at the theater. My local 8-theater complex is still playing Charlie Wilson's War all the way into March, and that's what's really important: For your film to still be accessible to the public months after release. Charlie Wilson's War debuted in an incredibly crowded weekend where Tom Hanks' star power competed head-to-head with Johnny Depp in "Sweeny Todd" and Nicholas Cage in "National Treasure 2 "anyway, so it's not like it was a battle of the best stories. As for the failure of Julia Roberts to secure box office clout, she's semi-retired and like Redford hasn't appeared in many films in the last few years to keep her name hot.

There's no doubt that star power still is the controlling factor in Hollywood. It's what makes Will Smith, the trio of Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightly and Johnny Depp; and Nicholas Cage dominate the box office with mediocre material. More importantly, stars still capture the public attention. That's why in most Oscar pools, people are 10 times much more excited about the acting races than they are best screenwriting or best directing races. Whenever, I suggest a movie to my parents, the first question they ask is, "Who's in it?"

The only difference between today and yesteryear? The public just has short-term memory. The Oscar races and the special edition end-of-the-year reviews that appear in most newspapers and magazines covering pop culture are eager to crown the stars of today and leave the stars of yesterday behind. How hot are the names Joaquin Pheonix, David Strathain, Reese Whitherspoon, Felicity Huffman, and Phillip Seymour Hoffman right now? How excited do you get about a film when you hear that one of those names is in it? Those were the leading contenders in the best actor and actress races at the 2006 Oscars, just two years ago. Two years ago, the public might have been far more excited about them which just goes to show how fast the trends move.

Not to worry, success can be achieved by catering to this trend. Case in point: Judd Apatow, Seth Rogen, and Jonah Hill not only had the good fortune of being involved in the summer's surprise hit "Knocked Up," but since their next film came out before the summer even ended, they benefited even more from being fresh in the minds of moviegoers. The result: Not only was Superbad a surprise hit as well, but Seth Rogen and Jonah Hill have become stars big enough to attract invites to host Saturday Night Live, and Judd Apatow was named the smartest man in Hollywood by Entertainment Weekly. Shia LeBouf, arguably the year's breakout star has benefited from a double-dose of audience exposure as well, slowly building his familiarity with the movie going public with Disturbia before officially breaking out in Transformers and this strategy has been going on for years. Would "Ray" have enjoyed the same level of hype if Jamie Foxx didn't start getting attention for "Collateral" earlier that summer? Of course being too prolific like Jude Law (the butt of an infamous Chris Rock joke during the Oscars), Will Ferrell, and Ben Stiller can tend to backfire.

So the trends have changed but the same formulas are still there. As long as people ask "Who's in it?" before they ask "What's the storyline?," stars will be the tools that drive the star system.

Monday, April 30, 2007

Breakout Supporting Roles and Best Picture Winners

I just noticed this pattern as i was strolling through some best picture winners. They usually feature either great supporting roles, breakout actors in supporting roles, or actors in supporting roles before they broke-out:

Titanic:
pre-Fantastic Four Ioan Gufford (if i spelt his name wrong, i don't care)
pre-Alias Viktor Garber
Kathy Bates

Shakespeare in Love:
pre-Love Actually Colin Firth
pre-Vera Drake Imadela Staunton
pre-In the Bedroom Tom Wilkinson

American Beauty:
pre-Star Trek: Enterprise Scott Bakula
pre-Seabiscuit Chris Cooper
pre-Ghost World Thora Birch
pre-West Wing Allison Janey
pre-O.C. Peter Gallagher

Gladiator:
pre-In America Djimon Hotsou
pre-Walk the Line Joaquin Pheonix in a breakout role

A Beautiful Mind:
pre-Rent Anthony Rapp
pre-Sweet Home Alabama Josh Lukas
perrenial character actor Adam Goldberg
Judd Hirsch
Ed Harris
pre-Wimbledon Paul Bettany in a Breakout Role

Chicago:
pre-Talladega Nights John C Riley in a Breakout Role
Lucy Lui
Christine Barinski
Queen Latifah

Lord of the Rings:
pre-Pirates Orlando Bloom (sort of)
pre-Hidalgo Virgo Mortgensen in a breakout role
Sean Astin
Christopher Lee
Cate Blanchett
Mirando Otto
Ian McKellan

Million Dollar Baby:
bucks the trend

Crash:
Ryan Phillipe
Thandie Newton
pre-Hustle and Flow (by 3 months) Terrence Howard
Jennifer Esposito
Sandra Bullock
Matt Dillon
Don Cheadle
Chris "Ludacris" Bridges in a breakout role

Departed:
Anthony Anderson, Vera Farminga, Ray Winstone and Mark Wahlberg will break out onto a new level of stardom, I predict
In addition, Martin Sheen and Alec Baldwin inhabit great small roles in this movie

Million Dollar Baby is the only one which bucks the trend, which is odd because Golden Globe winner of that year Aviator fits that trend better with a supporting cast that include:
Wilhem DeFoe, Jude Law, Gwen Stefani, Kate Beckinsdale, Cate Blanchett, John C. Riley, Ian Holm, Alec Baldwin and Alan Alda