Showing posts with label Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Show all posts
28.3.12
DVD: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
I read this book a really long time ago. Almost seven years ago. I intended to get Jonathan Safran Foer's other book, Everything is Illuminated, which was also being made into a movie later that year, but when I flipped through Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I had to get it. It was so much more than text on paper. There were photographs, sketches, red pen copy-edited pages, text with kerning running tighter and tighter into black masses. It was so interesting. Unfortunately, the story wasn't so much, but all of its visual creativity made up for it.
When this movie came out late last year, I really didn't care to see it. Of course, it couldn't retain the same innovation of its print form, but there's always room for innovation in direction. But I wasn't counting on it. And I'm glad I didn't, because for the most part, this movie was pretty flat.
Oskar (Thomas Horn) was really close with his dad (Tom Hanks). In the socially-awkward kid's eyes, they were best buds. They had inside jokes, they riddled each other with intellectual puzzles and no one else quite got Oskar like his dad did. So, when his dad dies in the September 11 attacks, Oskar is heartbroken, as anyone would be, and withdraws even further from the world. That's until he finds a key in his dad's closet one day and feels compelled to find out what it opens. His dad must have left it there for him, he thinks, it's another puzzle for him to figure out. So he takes to the city alone, at first, to figure it out.
It's not a terrible story. It's heartfelt and sweet at times, but it's way too slow and repetitive. For two hours, you follow this kid on his search that continues to lead nowhere. He does nearly the same thing everyday. Admittedly, it is more of an emotional coming of age story, and that train progresses, but a little more tension or novelty would have been nice.
What pulls this film through is its tremendous acting, particularly on the parts of Max von Sydow as the renter living with Oskar's grandmother and Sandra Bullock as Oskar's mom. As I've said before, Bullock was snubbed during this year's awards season. While at least Max von Sydow was nominated for an Oscar, Bullock saw nil. Fuelling this outrage was the fact that she won Best Actress two years ago for a performance that was just whatever. In this movie, she was so moving, so emotionally connecting, so convincing. I was completely blown away. What did they not see?!
If there's one basis I can recommend this film on, it's to see Bullock give a truly memorable and award-worthy performance. Otherwise, there's not much else here. B-
Starring Tom Hanks, Thomas Horn, Max von Sydow and Sandra Bullock. Directed by Stephen Daldry. 129 minutes. PG
Tags:
B-,
drama,
DVD,
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
26.2.12
And the Oscar Won't Go to ... (Michelle's picks)
We spent the last week looking back on the biggest Oscar snubs in recent history. Now, in honour of tonight's big broadcast, we bring you what we think were the most notable non-nominations of the year.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes
THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:
- Kenneth Branagh, My Week with Marilyn
- Jonah Hill, Moneyball
- Nick Nolte, Warrior
- Christopher Plummer, Beginners
- Max Von Sydow, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
WHY HE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: It's a movie in which apes ravage humankind in eventual escalation (possibly the previously released Wahlberg-starring sequel) to world dominance. It's not Oscar material, despite the ongoing campaign to get Andy Serkis the nom.
WHY HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN: Serkis makes ape Caesar more human than the humans in this film, even behind CGI. He creates a character you both sympathize with, wishing you could hold his hand at times and tell him it'll be OK, but who you also fear will lash out with unrestrained power. It's one of the most deeply emotional and moving performances of the year that the Academy failed to realize.
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: Drive, Newton Thomas Sigel
THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:
- The Artist, Guillaume Schiffman
- The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Jeff Cronenweth
- Hugo, Robert Richardson
- The Tree of Life, Emmanuel Lubezki
- War Horse, Janusz Kamiński
WHY IT DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: As Emily mentioned when she chose it for Best Pic, it's far too gritty and daring of a film to garner a nom.
WHY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN: The hues, lighting and composition in this movie are beyond gorgeous. If you ask me, I'd compare it to fine art. Choices are bold and risky, and they more than pay off. What the Academy literally did not see, I really can't say.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Elle Fanning, Super 8
THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:
- Bérénice Bejo, The Artist
- Jessica Chastain, The Help
- Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
- Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
- Octavia Spencer, The Help
WHY SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: Like Rise of the Planet of the Apes, sci-fi isn't a friend of the Academy unless it's got a political message (like District 9), though even then it's rare. Plus, kids don't get nominated as often as they should.
WHY SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN: Elle Fanning frequently stole scenes away in Super 8, amid an also amazing ensemble of kids. She was completely her age (which you can't always say for her famous sister) though created so much heartfelt depth to her character. Even when her character was acting in a movie within the movie, she was perfectly convincing.
BEST ACTOR: Ryan Gosling, anything (Ides of March, Drive and Crazy, Stupid Love)
THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:
- Demián Bichir, A Better Life
- George Clooney, The Descendants
- Jean Dujardin, The Artist
- Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
- Brad Pitt, Moneyball
WHY HE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: It's beyond me. Seriously.
WHY HE SHOULD HAVE: To me, this was the ultimate snub this year. In three stellar performances, Ryan Gosling proved he was more than young hearthrob and would be competent, award-winning actor for years to come, delivering expertly in comedy, drama and action. It was a dream year of a career which would only fittingly have been tied up with an Oscar nom (or even SAG).
WHY HE SHOULD HAVE: To me, this was the ultimate snub this year. In three stellar performances, Ryan Gosling proved he was more than young hearthrob and would be competent, award-winning actor for years to come, delivering expertly in comedy, drama and action. It was a dream year of a career which would only fittingly have been tied up with an Oscar nom (or even SAG).
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Sandra Bullock, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
THE ACTUAL NOMINEES:
- Bérénice Bejo, The Artist
- Jessica Chastain, The Help
- Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
- Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
- Octavia Spencer, The Help
WHY SHE DIDN'T GET NOMINATED: This is another one that's beyond reason, as was her win two years ago for Best Actress in The Blind Side. What the Academy saw then, I will never understand.
WHY SHE SHOULD HAVE: I was completely surprised by her performance in this film. After (overrated) The Blind Side performance and win, I wasn't expecting much but I was entirely blown away by her understated heart-wrenching performance of a woman who'd just lost her husband and was losing touch with her son. It was absolutely unforgettably touching.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





