Posted on 01/25/2005 5:53:22 AM PST by Borges
RE: "You finally got around to mentioning Magnolia. Finally. Tom Cruise should have got something for that performance. And I am not a Tom Cruise fan by any measure."
For my money, Magnolia was the Best Picture of 1999. No movie I've seen in recent years has better combined the deeply human, flawed and emotionally damaged characters of a chamber piece with the epic scope and feel of an Altman piece. The movie is not timid (frogs and sing-alongs at that), but is created by P.T. Anderson as a kind of bold, sweeping gesture, with the knowledge that nothing is actually more universal than our pain and regret, therefore the personal IS the epic.
Tom Cruise, Phillip Baker Hall, Jason Robards and William H. Macy all give some of the finest work of their careers, but it's the shaky whisper of a romance between Melora Walters troubled drug addict and John C. Reilly's good-hearted, Christian police officer that keeps Magnolia in my memory long after other great movies from the last decade have faded.
RE: " Don't be an a$$"
"I guess not all were stinkers in 99'. The Green Mile was ok and the 6th Sense should have won."
Hey, you put dollar signs in place of the S's. Your a** is better than mine...I'm so jealous LOL!
Yeah, the Sixth Sense was a thrilling, suspenseful horror film that put the emphasis on strong writing and performances rather than just all-out gory effects, and it was all the more memorable for it (even without the best twist ending since Verbal Kint shook off his limp).
However, I personally found the Green Mile to be so dull, predictible, and interminable that it almost seemed to be a deliberate mocking of a "prestige picture". That the Oscars fell for the mumbo-jumbo and length-as-importance approach (including nearly a half hour spent on little but using a mouse named Mr. Jingles to demonstrate the giants compassion and the guard's sadism) when they overlooked a truly dazzling epic that very year (Magnolia) was a horrid mistake on their part.
Except that Jennifer Connelly can actually act. Check out the disturbing indie Requiem for a Dream if you'd like a more obscure proof of her talents than her Oscar-winning role in the big budget A Beautiful Mind.
Yes, she can act and I am a fan of hers.
But she and Virginia Madsen used to be better known for taking off their tops in movies like "The Hot Spot". Virginia Madsen even dropped out for a while to raise her son. And I was very charmed at the way she resolved at that point to never do any more nudity again.
RE: "But she and Virginia Madsen used to be better known for taking off their tops in movies like "The Hot Spot"."
Yes, I'm actually well aware of this part of Connelly and Madsen's careers : )
RE: "And I was very charmed at the way she resolved at that point to never do any more nudity again"
Well, if that's what she wants...
(slightly disappointed shrug)
I was disappointed too for myself but happy for her. I can only console myself with the knowledge that "Gotham" which generously shares her blessings with us all, is now on DVD.
Totally agree - his performance was first-rate. Academy voters are morons....
Wasn't the novel upon which it was based written by Andre Debus?
(yawn)
"Shakespeare in Love" won because it was a movie about actors, and all about how wonderful it is to be an actor. And the actors branch is the largest segment of Academy voters. Naturally they loved it.
RE: "Wasn't the novel upon which it was based written by Andre Debus?"
Yes sir, Andre Dubus III.
It's staring down at me from a shelf across the room as I type.
RE: "Shakespeare in Love" won because it was a movie about actors, and all about how wonderful it is to be an actor. And the actors branch is the largest segment of Academy voters. Naturally they loved it."
Though I disagree with the Academy about SIL's worth relative to Saving Private Ryan, I can't disagree with their bias towards finely acted films (and movies about acting always feature fine performances). In fact, if I had to single out the one specific element of filmmaking that I most admire, it is good acting. Sometimes A good performer can liven up even the lousiest material, if forced to; whereas even Shakespeare himself couldn't salvage a film with bad, miscast actors in the lead roles.
I haven't read any of his novels-though, I've seen some of those that have been adapted into screenplays-but his short stories are brilliant, in my opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.