Weekend Forecast: 1/25/08
By Craig Kennedy - January 24th, 2008; 12:01 am
Anamaria Marinca in the harrowing 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days.
Opened in NY on 1/25 and hits LA and other cities on 2/1.
Another tepid January movie weekend. If you live in New York, go see 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. Otherwise, maybe you should read a book or clean out the refrigerator.
Here are the wide releases:
- How She Move. Since this is yet another film about youngsters from bad neighborhoods getting ahead in life by winning some kind of talent or athletic competition against all odds, I’m as surprised as you are to find I’m singling it out as the most promising looking new release for the week. This time the competition is step dancing (the percussive form of group dance seen in last year’s Stomp the Yard) and the bad neighborhood is in Toronto. This is not a great movie, but How She Move has a few things going for it above other films of its type: it has a certain grittiness born of its low budget, a feminine slant, a winning cast of unknowns that are actually pretty likable (especially the lead Rutina Wesley) and a lot of well choreographed, energetic and entertaining dance sequences. Not my cup of tea and certainly not for everyone, but the right audience (and you know who you are) will probably find something to like here, especially younger people who haven’t seen this sort of thing a million times before.
That was my “glass is half full” approach to film criticism. I hope you liked it. Now back to my usual self for the rest of the blurbs…
- Meet the Spartans. I thought 300 was funny enough without being satirized so you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t so much as tip my hat to the Spartans, let alone pay $11 to see them.
- Rambo. If you were young enough to still be afraid of girls in the mid to late ’80s, or if you were some kind of growth stunted, jingoistic retard, there’s a good chance you have fond memories of Sylvester Stallone as John Rambo and you’re looking forward to seeing the character revived 20 years later. I wasn’t, I don’t and I’m not.
- Untraceable. Look, I’m glad Diane Lane continues to get work. I’m just sorry it’s in stuff I have no interest in seeing. She’s investigating some kind of killer on the Internets or something. Internet fear is so 1999.
Expanding this weekend:
- No Country for Old Men. Fresh off of its 8 Oscar nominations, the Coen Brothers movie springs back into approximately 1500 theaters. Seen it once? Go see it again. Take a loved one. Seriously, the ending everyone is crying about is better when you see it coming. Go ahead. Check it out then come back and tell me I was wrong.
- There Will Be Blood. Jumps into approximately 800 theaters this weekend. For the love of all that is holy, just go see this movie. (thanks to Sartre for the heads up).
- Michael Clayton. Last week I erroneously reported that Michael Clayton was re-expanding. This week I’m reporting the same thing. Take it for what it’s worth.
Opening in limited release:
- 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. (NY 1/23) The Romanian film everyone was buzzing about that got ignored by Oscar. It opened in New York on Wednesday and it’s scheduled to open in Los Angeles and elsewhere next weekend. Though it tells the story of a young woman procuring a black market abortion in Communist era Romania, this is not a film about abortion. It’s more of an anti-totalitarian film and more importantly an exceptionally suspenseful and dramatic one. This is top shelf visceral filmmaking that never preaches or wears its politics on its sleeve. Don’t let the subject matter scare you off, though exceptionally squeamish people might want to tread cautiously. Read what I said about it during the AFI Festival here. Better yet, check the release calendar here and see for yourself. (thanks for the link Matthew)
- The Air I Breathe (Expands 2/1). Jieho Lee’s four overlapping fables about happiness, sorrow, pleasure and love. Starring Forest Whitaker, Andy Garcia, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Brendan Fraser, Kevin Bacon, Emile Hirsh and Julie Delpy. OK, you convinced me with Julie Delpy. French girls rule.
- Alice’s House. From Brazil. A middle aged manicurist with 3 sons and a loveless marriage rekindles a romance with a boyfriend from her adolescence.
- Lost in Beijing (NY). Another movie from filmmakers banned in China. This one’s about a ménage-a-quatre between a woman, her boss, her husband and the boss’s wife.
- Trailer Park Boys: The Movie (Expands 2/1). Based on the Canadian TV show. How far they’ve fallen since Kids in the Hall…
- Tropa de Elite (Elite Squad). Based on true events, this Brazilian police drama is about two men in a paramilitary force battling corruption and drug gangs in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro.
Filed under: Upcoming
I was invited to a press screening of “How She Move,” but I didn’t RSVP. Paramount Vantage usually has exquisite taste in film, but that one just doesn’t appeal to me at all, at least not worth driving 2 1/2 hours for, even if it is a free screening. It will just have to be one of the ones I miss.
It was definitely not a movie I’d go out of my way to see or even pay for, but it wasn’t bad. It’s pretty obvious what it is (though the trailer makes it look flashier than it really is) so if you’re unsure of it, your instinct is probably right. There are no surprises here.
Believe it or not, I like Carmen Electra. She’s glamourous as hell. She doesn’t come off as the brightest bulb in the barn, though. Come to think of it, can she act at all? I don’t think I’ve actually ever seen her in a movie. Aw, hell, skip it…
But what I was gonna say was, I actually laughed when I saw her in the TV spot for Meet The Spartans . But I guess she really has no talent, right? Fine. I’ll dispense with this subject. LOL
Like you, Mr. Kennedy, I am extraordinarily grateful that Diane Lane is still working. But it never happens to be in anything that I want to waste two hours on. I’m quite the fan. The last thing I paid to see her in was Hollywoodland. But I don’t see many of her movies any more. She’s likely being offered a lot of stuff that’s not terrific & she’s taking it cuz she’d rather work than not. It’s a bloody shame. She’s gorgeous & she’s a wonderful actor.
I want her to be nominated again. But she won’t ever be unless she finds a good part in a quality film. Let’s hope it’s soon….
Diane Lane’s career is just a sign of how insanely difficult it is to be a female actor in Hollywood beyond a certain age. If you’re lucky, you’re Meryl Streep and get first pick at all the good parts through you entire career. Otherwise the roles start drying up after the age of 25 and the competition gets fierce. Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer are reduced to playing wicked witches and Sigourney Weaver is doing TV commercials based on her most famous role. We should be happy that Lane is still plugging away while the likes of Debra Winger and Rosanna Arquette and Holly Hunter have all basically disappeared.
That, Jeff, is the absolute truth & then some…
But I’ve discussed this subject ad nauseum on several entertainment boards & blogs in the past few months. So I’ll save the rant for another day. LOL
I’ll just add a few things. As you’re really on target with your astute observation.
I think it is changing slowly. Little by little. Progress is being made. But it may be one of these things where the tide appears to be turning but it flip flops around several times over (& takes quite a few years) before real inroads take effect.
For example…
Dame Judi Dench is an adorable looking woman of a certain age. But she was never a beauty even when she was younger. She did very little film work until the 80s when she was approaching her 50s. She received her first Oscar nomination for Mrs. Brown in 97 (when she was in her 60s) & has never looked back. She has continued to rack up the noms & the great roles (many of them lead), culminating in her brilliant portrayal in Notes On A Scandal in 2006. Although she’s only one woman, Dame Judi’s spectacular rise at an age when most female actors have long since stopped being considered for ANYTHING is nothing less than very good news.
Likewise encouraging is Helen Mirren’s deserved Oscar win for The Queen last year. Ms. Mirren is in her 60s. Still glamourous & a regal head turner. She got to win an Academy award at an age where female actors are considered disposable if not nonexistent. She not only continues to work but she is still considered to be “hot” & “desirable”. Even five years ago this would never have happened. She MAY have taken the big prize but the media would have attached the term “fluke” to her victory. She would never have been employed in the industry again as she would been deemed “too old”. Looking at Dame Mirren & her impressive physicality (she easily appears decades younger & she’s just as sexy as many half her age IMO), you’d have to be bloody sexist to make that stick.
But everyone that knows anything about the film industry (male dominated & controlled by dudes since its creation) is aware that it’s one of the worst offenders ever. Now, the examples that I’ve discussed involve only two people (& by coincidence they’re both Brits) but I think the wheels have been set in motion. At least, I sincerely hope so…
In fairness, Debra Winger turned her back on the business before it had a chance to take its toll. She’s an interesting case. She was neither a beauty nor a conventional sexpot. But she had a certain accessible earthy attractiveness & a warm sensuality to her. (I knew plenty of guys who thought she was something else back in the day.) But what she had that set her apart from the crowd was real, raw talent. Ms. Winger – despite her unconventional appearance – had actual star quality. Which is rare.
So she was offered EVERYTHING under the sun. At the height of her popularity her name attached to any project had the studios & the big money guys intensely interested. But she was an outspoken personality. I think she cared passionately about the quality of her work. She wouldn’t back down if she felt things weren’t being done right. So she acquired three Oscar nominations. But she was also saddled with a reputation for being difficult. (Funny that in a town with more than its share of inflated egos & megalomaniacs it’s always the chicks that this label sticks to. Barbra Streisand, Bette Davis, producer Julia Phillips, the list goes on & on…) That can be tough to shake.
By the 90s she had grown weary of the game & began to work much less by choice. I don’t think money was ever her motivating factor so I don’t feel that it was ever a drawback for her. She attempted to get a long awaited dream project together & when it fell apart she became so disillusioned that she largely withdrew from the business. She said it was just too much.
But perhaps she was well aware of the career difficulties at that juncture (she had all ready been a popular & successful actor for well over a decade) & she knew what she was going to have to face.
I have seen Holly Hunter on TV lately (playing that wild, sexy, hard drinking cop on that limited series – the name escapes me at the moment), but yeah…
The points you made are extremely valid, Jeff. Unfortunately, that is the way it is. For now.
I guess one of the reasons Ms. Lane is still working it is cuz she was a child actor that grew up with the business. She started out as a kid in movies like A Little Romance, segued into hot adult roles like Streets Of Fire, The Big Town & Chaplin…& finally received her first Oscar nod in her 30s for Unfaithful.
So I think she’s very realistic about her prospects. This is what she loves to do & she’s going to continue no matter what.
But my hat is off to you for illuminating the ridiculous realities of the film industry. It’s a tough gig for guys. But much harder for women.
I do see some light at the end of the tunnel, though. You can’t stop what’s coming…
I’m seeing Rambo. I am very afraid of girls but I tend to resist jingo. I’m not taking as anything beyond the B movie fodder it aims to be, but I miss the un-PC ultraviolent ’80s actions movies. They were at least less hypocritical about their nature than the films of today.
I also like Sylvester Stallone, not making much of a case for him as an actor, but I think he’s an interesting personality, and I root for him in movies. I think he can be a funny guy when he puts his mind to it. I also liked Rocky Balboa. The film is clunky and anti-climactic, but Stallone is still quite canny on drawing on himself in a way that the audience roots for him both in the movie and in real life.
Of course Rocky has nothing to do with the vengeful, psychotic ’80s monster that is Rambo.
Also hope to check There Will Be Blood again.
Also, I’ve had a crush on Ms. Lane ever since The Outsiders, and that crush was reignited in a big way a few years ago in Unfaithful (co-starring the eternally underrated Richard Gere.) She’s still a beautiful, talented, charismatic actress, and it sucks that she has to switch hit between chick flicks and boring looking horror movies.
Is Killshot ever getting released? Has an awesome cast, and its one of the best Leonard books.
I was goofing around in my On Demand function last night and saw that “4 Months, 3 Weeks…” is available on IFC On Demand.
I would much rather see it in a theater, but with the release schedule unknown that might not be possible. Or if it is possible it might not happen till, oh, April.
I hope my comment about Ms. Lane wasn’t take as a criticism of her personally. I think she’s great and I am glad she’s still working and I am sad I won’t be in the theater to see it and I do know it’s not her fault.
4 Weeks. Without an Oscar nomination, will it ever play outside of NY and LA? I agree it would be best seen in a theater, and it might lose some of the sense of clausterphobia and tension on the small screen, but I think it would still be good.
Chuck. Clarification, I wasn’t implying a person had to be afraid of girls NOW to want to see Rambo, just that you were young enough to appreciate him back in the 80’s.
I’ve actually heard from a couple of reasonably reliable sources that it’s good, violent fun. Extremely violent.
You’re much too sensitive, my beloved crab boy.
I can’t speak for the other participants around these parts, but I know you were not speaking ill regarding the fabulous Ms. Lane.
I never inferred that you meant anything negative regarding her & I never took it as such. Untraceable looks like an utter crap fest that is completely unworthy of someone with her talents.
That is not her fault. That’s just the way it is…
No, I got you Craig, no offense taken. I just wish that Stallone had the cojones to call it Fourth Blood: Rambo part III.
Ahahah…Fourth Blood.
I am too sensitive Serena, but I like me this way.
Funny thing is, I was bracing myself to take crap over not being snarky enough towards How She Move and instead ended up defending my snark towards deserving targets.
I gotta be me.
Well, I’m going to see There Will Be Blood again tomorrow. And introducing some friends who never saw it. :-)
I plan on seeing all of the BP nominees again (even Juno).
And, I’m late to the party, but I second Jeff McM and Serena on everything they said about women in Hollywood, Diane Lane and Debra Winger. Debra Winger turned her back on it, but here’s hoping Diane Lane will start to land some meaty roles in quality movies.
I wonder if TWBB will be expanding, what with all of its Oscar nominations. I haven’t been able to find info that it is, but that doesn’t mean anything.
Also, if you haven’t seen 4 Months yet, you might want to have a look. Not sure what you’ll think, but it’s good.
I’m excited to see 4 Months next week at a random Walker Art Center screening here in Minneapolis. Not sure when it’s going to open at the Landmark Theatres here – maybe mid February. I think word-of-mouth and box office numbers will help it expand despite the Oscar snub.
I hope you’re right.
Some of my friends want to see Rambo, but I’m trying to sway them toward There Will Be Blood (which is opening about 20 miles away). Not much luck on that front so far.
On Monday I’m going to see Juno, though, at a free screening in my dorm.
4 Months is playing in San Rafael, CA, about 12 miles or so north of San Francisco.
I plan on seeing it again.
I also want to see Rambo, just because, well, what else is there right now? I agree with Chuck that Rocky Balboa had some merit, despite its obvious flaws. Stallone’s lack of pretense makes him more worthwhile than many of the “budding big action hunks” of today.
I saw There Will Be Blood for a third time and Atonement for a second time yesterday. The girlfriend loves Atonement in ways I’ll never quite understand. We both agree about A Very Long Engagement, though, aha.
“4 Weeks” will be playing in most states according to the official website, which has a complete schedule of when and where it’s opening.
I tried linking to the supposed ‘official site’ and it was down. Which address did you use?
Ask and you shall receive, Craig:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ia80f69a7374eff9dccd63f8717b196d0
Thank you both for utterly shaming my investigative abilities. Columbo I ain’t.
http://www.ifcfilms.com/viewFilm.htm?filmId=496
The IFCfilms main page has the release date info.
I swear I looked at that page…
I didn’t see any release date info on either of those web pages but it’s probably because I’m blind or inept. However, elsewhere I’ve seen that 4 Months… will be playing Portland starting (tentatively) Feb 29th. That’s a long way off for me.
Here’s a more direct link:
http://server.mammothnyc.com/ifcschedule/films/4+Months+3+Weeks+and+2+Days/
Thanks Matt.
Question: How does 4, 3, 2 compare to last year’s The Death of Mr. Lazarescu? They have the same cinematographer and editor.
Since Lazarescu was much lauded last year, we got it from Netflix, but couldn’t get through it. The hubby and I have a pretty deep and broad knowledge and love of films (especially him, I’m newer to it all), but that one bored and befuddled us. Whatever emotional force the Rumanian healthcare system’s apathy towards lonely old men was supposed to have had for us, it missed. We got so tired of watching it, we actually turned it off. Maybe if we had stuck with it, we would have suddenly been overcome with empathy and insight, but neither of us had any desire to stick it out.
That experience leads me to believe that 4,3,2 will be similarly tedious for us, despite its critical acclaim. Any thoughts? I don’t want to be a philistine and I certainly don’t need Hollywood gloss to enjoy or appreciate a movie, I just couldn’t understand why anyone would want to make that one, much less sit through it.
I hated Lazarescu. Not necessarily because it was boring, there was a strange, sad fascination to watching this guy’s downhill slide, but after a while it all became too much. It became unbelievable and it lost me.
Anyway 432 is different. It starts out kind of slow, but it’s just sneaking up on you. Strip away the politics and whatnot, and you’ve got a pretty remarkably done suspense film/character study.
In a way I think it plays better as ‘a movie’ than Lazarescu, though it has a lot more on its mind than just entertainment.
OK, I’ve seen the photo leading this post about a million times, but I can’t see 4 Months until next Wednesday.
What would you say the expression on her face shows? Annoyance by what that guy is doing outside the window? Indigestion? Disgust at the person sitting next to her?
How is there not a better still from this movie?
I enjoyed Lazarescu, though not so much I’d own it. The unfolding Kafkaesque social realism story held my attention throughout. And I thought the character acting of the lead, who passed away recently, was outstanding. As well and truly complicit as he was in his ailments the character’s pitiless treatment by the health system was tragic and telling. Jennybee, if you didn’t find it engaging up to the point you gave up on it I doubt anything would have changed had you persisted. Maybe only the philistines like it :-)
It’s funny you mention that Daniel because there is one other still from this movie that I’ve seen even more…the one where she’s in the bathroom looking in hte mirror. I chose this one simply because I hadn’t seen it as often.
For the record, the answer is: she’s annoyed with her boyfriend.
Off topic: TWBB is even better the second time. I just saw it today. :-)
And my friends loved it, which was a relief to me since I recommended the movie to them.
This is my mantra: It’s better the 2nd time.
Glad you’re spreading the word A.
Next, I’m taking my one friend to see No Country. :-)
You’re like a movie missionary.
I’m going to see TWBB again on Sunday. It will be my first time seeing it with an audience so I’m looking forward to seeing how other people react to it.
Yeah I’ve seen that other still at the mirror, and the one where she’s depressingly leaning her head against a door.
All three add up to what’s surely the feel-good movie of 2007.
Speaking of my weekend…
I did see Charlie Wilson’s war on Thursday night. I enjoyed it much more than I thought I would.
Mr. Hanks is stellar & reminded me (in this particualr role) of the impressive performances he’s done in the past.
I thought Julia was fantastic. She’s becoming a spectacular character actor (as opposed to the “BIGGEST FEMALE STAR ON THE PLANET” – a label that she’s lived with for at least 15 years) . Considering the work she did in Closer (a career high point IMO) I’d say she’d be wise to continue to work with Mike Nichols. I always thought that Julia was rather underrated. I got tired of critics saying that she coasted on her considerable charm & used things like her hair & smile to deflect attention away from her acting. I thought she was a very talented woman. She just needed the right part to make people take notice.
So she did…in films like Closer & Erin Brockovich. In CWW she absolutely IS Joanne. There is not a discernable trace of Julia in that portrayal. That scene where she sits down with PSH & he propositions her is priceless. I also loved that little moment where she walks past all the women that Charlie employs & says, “Sluts,” softly as she passes, looking them dead in the eyes. LOL Julia was THE BOMB,
Likewise PSH. His first scene was a doozy. Audience members were laughing so hard that I thought some of them might throw up. Very well deserved nod for PSH. I had just seen him in The Savages the previous evening. So the contrast was still fresh in my mind. I had also seen him in BTDKYD (twice) earlier in the fall. Gotta say that he is one of the most brilliant character actors around now.
This was a lot of fun. Even Amy Adams & Emily Blunt couldn’t ruin the experience for me.
But something obviously happened to CWW. It’s the editing & the script & the direction. Looks like a combination of factors. Not just one. There is a cool four star film just screaming to get out. But it couldn’t break out or be reshaped properly. So, for me it’s a 7/10 when it could’ve been a 10. They really screwed up the ending too. It needed much more work & scrutiny. It’s unfortunate. The film had a lot of potential.
Last night I saw TWBB again. That’s three Friday nights in a row for me (along with assorted others LOL) & this film. What does that say about my relationship with Daniel Plainview & the ideals that he espouses? LOL
Even though I was tired I found it JUST breathtaking. It resonates so deeply with me. It went by in the blink of an eye. Things are falling into place as I type this. I understood much more of the complexities & the relationships between the characters. I guess every time I watch it I’ll grasp some things on an entirely different level. It was just so mesmerizing.
Next week I plan to see Into The Wild (for the third & final time), Atonement (for the fourth time) & TWBB (for the fourth time as well). Then I’ll see Atonement & TWBB all over again & Juno (for the fourth time) just before the ceremony.
Such an impressive year for film. Hard to believe this could ever happen again – but I’m glad it did….
Glad your hot date with TWBB when down well. The second time was the best for me. The third time just solidified everything I already knew and by the 4th time, I felt I was done with it for a little while. Great stuff.
CWW was fine. I suspect the problems with it are the result of much editing after the fact designed to tone down the politics from what it had been earlier in the screenplay. This not only had an unfortunate taming effect, it also led to an uneveness of tone. It didn’t make the transition between comedy and drama very well. It kind of lurched back and forth, compared to say The Savages which pulled off comedy and drama with in single scenes flawlessly.
PSH was terrific. Tom Hanks was surprisingly good, though I wish his character had been rougher around the edges as he was in real life. You’re in the minority of people who liked Julia in it, I think. I’m kind of on your side, though I think she was the weak link, mainly owing to the fact she had so little to do. I think her character was cut after the fact because the real woman threatened to sue. I don’t know about her accent which many people described as horrible. I don’t pay attention to these kinds of things. It was passable to a tone deaf west coaster like me.
Hated the book end material at the awards ceremony. When the film started, I groaned audibly. It’s such a cliche and I thought the movie was going to be horrible. Luckily it rallied.
Serena, I only saw it for the second time, but I agree that much more of the complexities and the relationships are revealed upon the second viewing. There was a lot of things like that which I missed on the first viewing. In hindsight they should have been obvious, but it’s that kind of movie.
You also very articulately expressed what was right about CWW and what they got wrong. It really had the potential to be more than it was. In the end, though, it was a highly enjoyable movie with great turns by all.
Philip Seymour Hoffman deserves a “body of work” Oscar this year for his three vastly different character portrayals in BTDKYD, The Savages and CWW.
The first time, TWBB was like a steamroller. I literally wasn’t sure what I’d just seen. It was overwhelming. I didn’t even have a proper bead on Daniel Plainview and I think I misread the final scene between him and his son. I didn’t see a wounded man, I saw an evil man finally revealing his true black heart…but this is wrong. They he’d been destroyed and largely emptied, he was bluffing in this scene methinks and it’s very sad.
The only character he’s ever genuinely bad to is Eli who deserves it for being a weasel. He mishandles HW, but up to a point you get the sense he’s trying the best he knows how. For a guy who knows holes in the ground but not peope, his attempt is almost admirable. It’s only in the end when he’s the husk of a human that he really turns on HW, but by doing so he also seals his own doom. There’s only one more burst of energy left inside him…
Yeah, Craig. EXACTLY. Do you know that I actually heard him say, “I love you,” to H.W. when he had him come back home after being away for so long? This is after he lost his hearing. Right before the poor kid starts wailing on him.
When he’s broken & close to the end of his rope (cuz he’s feeling betrayed by H.W. – he’s like a wounded animal) he tells H.W that he never loved him, that he was a bastard in a basket etc.
But you can ALWAYS tell how people feel if you just let them alone & bide your time. If people treat you in a positive fashion where no one’s around to witness it & they’re not getting anything out of it (i.e. there are no benefits to be derived), then you pretty much have the real deal right there.
No one was there. HW, come to think of it, couldn’t hear him either. But there’s that scene – & also the scene on the train before the very first bit of dialogue starts. Where Plainview has the baby H.W. sitting with him & the child tugs on his moustache.
Plainview loved that boy. But his heart was broken. That’s why he told him to f off & said he wasn’t his son. Nobody will ever hurt you the way people will that have really loved you. There’s too much at stake. All that stuff is too intense. Big emotions have very similar feelings & nuances to them.
I felt sorry for Plainview. But he had to protect himself. That’s why he was ruthless. He had to get the first shot in. No matter what…
I know everyone says that Plainview is an unsympathetic character, but I actually did have a lot of pity for him. His weakness is exactly that: he knows holes in the ground but not people, and not only does he mishandle H.W., he feels betrayed by the fact that he becomes ’sick’ – which is why he smacks the sh*t out of Eli when he approaches him for his money. Of course, H.W. telling him he’s going to start his own company is the final betrayal and it (and his worsening alcoholism) pushes him over the edge finally.
Eli was a weasel. And Eli, of course, was the one who humiliated him to the core.
Serena, that’s one of the things I picked up the second time. He says it so quietly, I didn’t catch it the first time. But I did this time.
Yes, he is COMPLETELY heartbroken. And I have to say that even on the first viewing I got that he felt betrayed H.W. Hate and love are two sides of one coin. He loved the boy that much and when he turned on him, as he perceived it, it was truly the last nail in the coffin.
What about the scene where HW comes back after Daniel sent him away. The first thing Daniel does is hold him close and he’s practically cooing “that does me good.” and the next thing he does is turn around and proudly show the boy the work he’s been doing on the pipeline. It’s business, but they’re interconnected.
Yep, I got the “that does me good” line this time. I don’t think it registered the first time.
Also…who says girls don’t love TWBB?? I see two of ‘em right here.
And there were some female critics who loved it too. Dargis comes to mind. :-)
Craig, you’re a guy so you should know this.
Men are uncomfortable with their emotions. To this day it’s tough for lots of men to be open about how they feel. They don’t want to come off as weak or ineffectual. There’s all this crap in the culture about how men are supposed to be big & strong & manage everything.
That’s BS. Everyone is afraid sometimes. Everyone that is healthy cries, feels sad, has emotional needs that have to be taken care of. But it’s tough for men. Society says that if you’re a guy all that’s not cool. Which is just utter stupdity. If you’re a human being (& you’re not a sociopath), you feel things.
But Plainview lived a hundred years ago. So there would have been no way that he would ever be able to be that open with HW. Men back then ran companies & built houses. But I don’t think many of them were really in touch with their feelings. It wouldn’t have been considered properly masculine.
The fact that Plainview couldn’t express his great affection for HW doesn’t make him a monster. I don’t think any other men of his generation were doing that either.
Like I said, even today all of that is very difficult. Men will run from stuff that makes them feel vulnerable.
Manohla has atoned for not digging Jesse James. First her lovely review of TWBB. Then her excellent summary of Sundance and just yesterday she got all dreamy over 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. It saddens me she no longer writes for the LA Times, but she’s better off far away from that rag with it’s endless Envelope awards pandering and celebrity gossip whoring.
Serena, Plainview is not only a man 100 years ago, but he’s also a mover and a shaker. An empire builder. These kinds of people can’t show their soft underbellies. So yeah, I’m agreeing with you and adding on to what you’re saying.
I must say that it is a constant pleasure to read such astute discussions about TWbB by people who actually get it. Bravo to (in alphabetical order) Alexander, Alison, Chuck, Craig, Joel, and Serena. It’s always a pleasure.
Talking about this movie will never get old (NCfOM either).
Thank you for that lovely tribute, sartre. Even though my name begins with an S so I’m automatically last. LOL
I feel a little like Julia when she won her Oscar for Erin B, where she said that she loved the list of the women she was nominated with. Even though she was last & her name began with R.
That is the luck of the draw.
But, you know, sartre…
TWBB is such a fantastic film. Even if it doesn’t win the BP Oscar (& IT SHOULD – either that or Atonement) this movie will be talked about, discussed, dissected, taken apart totally, put back together again & praised effusively for many generations to come. People will talk aout this picture endlessly. It has classic written all over it.
So I’m pleased to say it has nothing to do with me. It’s the film.
But it is about you guys. You recognize that there is a there there :-)
There’s just no hamburger phone there, thank god.
I noticed that beautiful softly spoken line, “I love you,” from Plainview to H.W. during their reunion the second time as well. As Serena says, it occurs just before the kid starts attacking Plainview.
I don’t think there is any question that Plainview loved his “son.” The scene where he’s holding him, confused and frightened because he doesn’t understand his son’s illness, continually telling him in an inarticulate manner to hush (the kid is trying to hear himself by maknig noises, to no avail–this is a terrifying sensation and when you’re a sixteen-year-old and your ears are crammed with earwax and you have no idea what’s wrong, and you think you’re becoming deaf it can be truly scary… thank goodness for Q-tips and ear-cleaners… ah, I digress) essentially demonstrates this. Plainview’s love for H.W. becomes more important to him in his absence, as all things that matter greatly to men do, and particularly in the wake of the betrayal by the fraud who posed as his brother, leaving a gaping wound in Plainview’s consciousness.
In the latter act of the film, Plainview hurts H.W. because he feels hurt by H.W. I think it’s as simple as that. He feels as though H.W. is forsaking his “father,” so why not tell the unruly and ungrateful brat where to go? To him, it’s just tit for tat. You’re denying my importance to you as your father by not only splitting but by becoming a competitor of mine? Treat me like I’m not your blood? Well, you’re not. To hell with you, you’re not even really my son.
I’d posit that this verbal eructation, this invective from Plainview could only have occurred due to his isolation, his insular existence from that “time leap” Anderson uses to catapult to the finish line and that his obsessions gradually overtook him to the point where he kind of no longer cared much about what he did anymore.
So, ultimately, the one thing–the one relationship–that gave a deeper emotional meaning to Plainview’s life crumbles, too, and like Craig said above he only had so much energy for one final confrontation.
Thanks for the kind words yet again, sartre. You may have different opinions on existentialism and Marxism from my own, however. ;-)
craig….do you thiunk the ‘right’ audience for films such as ‘how she move’ reads blog like yours ??? they hate critics……
all they need is a trailer. a mane star and a cam be summed in one sentence what’s it about type thing.
ah close ???
I doubt I attract much of a How She Move audience Glim, but I tried to be fair and realistic, no matter what. One of the kids of someone who reads LiC might like it.
I finally saw 4 Months this last week. Wow. Still absorbing it…
Unexpectedly intense, no? I was sort of expecting a heavy handed political drama, but it delivers something else altogether. It still leaves you thinking, but you don’t feel hit in the face with a Big Message.
That’s the unbelievable achievement. An incredibly rich story (all the themes!) with no overt agenda. I’m stunned by the stickiness of it.
I think we’re so used to films dealing with such loaded topics as abortion taking a strong stand one way or the other that we almost don’t know what to make of a film that takes a neutral stance.
Neutral isn’t exactly the right word, but I really felt like it straddled both sides of the abortion argument. It clearly shows what happens when choice is not a legal option, but it also takes great care to show the physical horrors of the procedure.
Not to mention the fact that it really transcends the subject matter and hits on more universal themes.