I haven't watched the Golden Globes yet, but I can see why Jeff Bridges was nominated as Best Actor for Crazy Heart.
Everything about him, from his years-of-smoking cough, to his whiskey addled voice and the way he drawls--he embodies the perfect portrayal of the once famous, still talented, burnt-out country star he plays. It's a bit eerie how much he looks like a mix between Kris Kristofferson and Merle Haggard; that's precisely the kind of heartfelt, bad living cowboy crooner he's playing.
Maggie Gyllenhaal, who I've never been a fan of, was fantastic in the role of a free spirited, passionate woman tamed by her protectiveness for her son and let free by her love for Bridges' Blake. She is the portrait of a woman who is amazed and feeling too lucky to be loved by Blake, because her bones are telling her he's bound to hurt her. Love her he does...whole-heartedly, in a way that the audience knows is special. Hurt her, he does as well.
This is a story about the redemption and comeback of a talented has-been and Bridges plays it like a pro. Making the film that much richer is Robert Duvall playing Blake's friend and only permanent tie to the world. Any film with Duvall playing a cowboy or western cohort, is made richer by his presence.
This film is also a love song about country music and the west, as the camera lingers on scenes of blue sky, big white storm clouds, wheat and red canyon rock. "Crazy Heart" isn't bloated or too big, just on point enough with big actors who play it accurately and quietly, in a film about a man's crazy heart and the love that inspires his return to life and notoriety.
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Monday, January 18, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
Sherlock Holmes Movie Review
I was raised on British television; I remember Masterpiece Theater, Diana Rigby introducing that night's mystery in her velvety tones and intriguing voice. I remember the really cheesy and low budget original Dr. Who with the fuzzy edged monsters. I was raised on Babar and Tintin cartoons and I'm always mystified that so many people mistake the boy detective of Tintin with the dog on Rin Tin Tin. No, they are not the same thing---go get yourself an Herge comic book and learn something from Tintin and his brave dog Snowy. I was raised on British productions of Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot and think no one could portray that detective better than David Suchet.
I was raised on British television. One of my fondest memories stems from watching the Sherlock Holmes series that featured Jeremy Brett. I have an extreme fondness for Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law, (something about them being great actors and my weakness for tall, dark and handsome men), but I wasn't sure I wanted to see someone else attempt to portray a character I associated so closely with the skilled arrogance and wise deduction of Jeremy Brett's Holmes.
However, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised by Downey's Sherlock. He's taken a page from Brett's book---Downey plays the character with a mix of conceit, arrogance, brilliance and social awkwardness. But Downey's Holmes is a bit more rakish; he deduces things about people Brett's Holmes wouldn't care enough about to even speak to. Downey's Holmes has a bit more warmth in his eyes as well. This new Holmes does not act as if Watson is a companion, but more like a best friend, a brother. And that's where the film's conflict comes from.
For Law's part, this Watson plays better than Holmes' sidekick; he's Holmes' adventurous equal--brave, strong, able to clock a man or two in the face. This Watson is also more fleshed out. We know about his engagement to a woman he cares for, and how his curiosity leads him into dark corners and dangerous alleys with Holmes even though he knows there's a good woman and warm household waiting for him.
If you haven't seen Sherlock Holmes and you think it might be your type of movie, or you're not sure if Downey and Law can pull off the first dynamic duo---go see the film. I'll warn you it's a bit long. But if you're down with a little occult mixed in with your crime mystery and thriller starring two great actors in beloved roles, you won't be let down.
I was raised on British television. One of my fondest memories stems from watching the Sherlock Holmes series that featured Jeremy Brett. I have an extreme fondness for Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law, (something about them being great actors and my weakness for tall, dark and handsome men), but I wasn't sure I wanted to see someone else attempt to portray a character I associated so closely with the skilled arrogance and wise deduction of Jeremy Brett's Holmes.
However, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised by Downey's Sherlock. He's taken a page from Brett's book---Downey plays the character with a mix of conceit, arrogance, brilliance and social awkwardness. But Downey's Holmes is a bit more rakish; he deduces things about people Brett's Holmes wouldn't care enough about to even speak to. Downey's Holmes has a bit more warmth in his eyes as well. This new Holmes does not act as if Watson is a companion, but more like a best friend, a brother. And that's where the film's conflict comes from.
For Law's part, this Watson plays better than Holmes' sidekick; he's Holmes' adventurous equal--brave, strong, able to clock a man or two in the face. This Watson is also more fleshed out. We know about his engagement to a woman he cares for, and how his curiosity leads him into dark corners and dangerous alleys with Holmes even though he knows there's a good woman and warm household waiting for him.
If you haven't seen Sherlock Holmes and you think it might be your type of movie, or you're not sure if Downey and Law can pull off the first dynamic duo---go see the film. I'll warn you it's a bit long. But if you're down with a little occult mixed in with your crime mystery and thriller starring two great actors in beloved roles, you won't be let down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)