We're excited to present a great new set of boards to classic movie fans with tons of new features, stability, and performance.

If you’re new to the message boards, please “Register” to get started. If you want to learn more about the new boards, visit our FAQ.

Register

If you're a returning member, start by resetting your password to claim your old display name using your email address.

Re-Register

Thanks for your continued support of the TCM Message Boards.

X

Kyle Kersten was a true friend of TCM. One of the first and most active participants of the Message Boards, “Kyle in Hollywood” (aka, hlywdkjk) demonstrated a depth of knowledge and largesse of spirit that made him one of the most popular and respected voices in these forums. This thread is a living memorial to his life and love of movies, which remain with us still.

X

Jump to content


Photo

Films of 2017


  • Please log in to reply
131 replies to this topic

#21 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:48 AM

Agreed. More special effects, fantasy, comic book stuff, etc.

Saw the trailer for Dunkirk. Might be worth a look because I like history, but doubt if audiences will flock to see it.

Although very early in general there is at least 1 or more pix that make the Oscar cut & looking ahead "Dunkirk" & "The Beguiled' may be them?



#22 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:46 AM

Fine trailers, but do you see-(though as we know it's still premature)

 

Of her snagging her 1st nomination of it & more-over Nicole again?

 

I've been oddsmaking Oscar since '82 when I was a kid & among the few things I've learned & some fellow handcappers is go by the director & it's Oscar winner Sophia Coppola-(for the wonderful "Lost in Translation)

How could most 4-get Dunst in 1994's "Interview With the Vampire"



#23 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:44 AM

On Monday, I saw my first movie of 2017, Song to Song.  Here is Richard Brody's review from his New Yorker blog:

 

Terrence Malick is a romantic idealist. His films revel in the unity of the virtues, of beauty, truth, and justice fused in an ultimate realm that leaves its glimmers on Earth and finds its ordinary place amid humanity in the form of love. Even more than his flowing, fragmentary, allusive methods, it’s his transcendental world view that renders him grandly untimely, that makes critics who are smitten with television’s cynical “darkness” repudiate the cathedral-like sublimity of his vision.

 

In his new film, “Song to Song,” Malick does something new with his familiar technique: he builds his cathedral from the ground up, filming mainly in his home town of Austin, Texas, and anchoring the movie on a starkly clear framework—a simple story of couples in doubt and conflict. But within his story of a shifting romantic triangle he develops both a teeming, harshly emotional web of relationships and an overwhelming, rapturous variety of visual experience. Forging under pressure a new way of telling familiar (and family) stories, Malick also displays a conspicuously painterly boldness, a sort of cinematic Impressionism that locates an indelible force of light and detail in the stuff of daily life.

 

umpv_06749_r_crop.jpg?w=780

 

It’s common practice when writing about a movie to offer at least a sketch of the plot; with “Song to Song,” that banality becomes an act of criticism—and of enthusiasm—in itself. That’s because, despite Malick’s daringly collage-like assemblage of images that only dart across the surfaces of their narrative elements, the movie has a rich, complex, thoroughly imagined plot of a novelistic amplitude. Going into detail about the story is, above all, proof that the movie has a story—that Malick is not a captive of his finely crafted style but, rather, able to deploy it to realize a dramatically engrossing world.

 

The names of the movie’s characters aren’t mentioned, with the exception of its protagonist, Faye (Rooney Mara), who’s pursuing a career in music and lands in a relationship with the record-company mogul (Michael Fassbender) for whom she had been working as a receptionist. With him, she has gotten used to a life of comfort, but she’s not doing much with music. At a party, Faye meets another young Austin musician (Ryan Gosling), who is something of the impresario’s protégé—he’s signed to a deal and being groomed for stardom—and she, the musician, and the mogul become something of a “Jules and Jim”-like trio, jetting off to Mexico in the rich man’s private plane and cavorting freely on the beach. But on that Mexico jaunt Faye—during a side trip to an abandoned monastery—realizes that she has fallen in love with the young man, and this becomes painfully clear to the mogul. Soon after the return to Austin, the mogul shamelessly flirts with a waitress (Natalie Portman), a former kindergarten teacher down on her luck, and eventually they marry.

 

 

song-to-song-STS_FP_081_rgb.jpg

On the basis of this classic setup of an unstable triangle, Malick goes on to build a wide and passionate tangle of new relationships and long-standing bonds. The mogul’s dealings with the young man fall apart, but the mogul and Faye aren’t done with each other; they still have a sexual relationship—and he offers her a record contract. Faye and the young musician break up; he meets a former girlfriend (Lykke Li) and gets involved with a socialite (Cate Blanchett), whom he meets at another fancy party. Faye gets involved with a Parisian artist (Bérénice Marlohe), whom she meets by chance. The mogul, despite being married, frequents prostitutes (one of whom, played by Jaylen Jones, speaks insightfully about her work) and drives his wife to despair. And, through the turmoil of erotic and professional distractions, Faye and the young musician (Gosling) find each other again. While the romantic entanglements tighten and slacken, the lovers’ families are woven among them. One of the movie’s strongest presences is the waitress’s mother, played by Holly Hunter, who delivers lines that ring like hammer blows: “You need money for a lawyer; the law’s no help for people who are ruined.” Linda Emond also plays a key and memorable role as the mother of the young musician, and, as Faye’s father, Brady Coleman invests just a few lines and glances with a deep, world-worn wisdom.

The music world is also woven into the story, with a sharp and self-deprecating backstage anecdote delivered by Iggy Pop, and, above all, with the recurring, majestic presence of Patti Smith, as herself, who serves as a mentor to Faye and as the movie’s tough-mindedly romantic philosophical conscience. “Song to Song” is filled with music, both applied to the soundtrack and performed onscreen by musicians and actors, and the spontaneous bursts of dance that arise, whether at parties or onstage, in a crowd or during isolated moments of flirtation and courtship, give the movie the feel of a musical, one in which the music arises from within and emerges in action.

 

Malick brings this mighty story to life in a copious array of images of a breathtakingly generous, gentle beauty. The cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki creates plunging, whirling, beatifically graceful, seemingly borderless images that gather light lovingly and avidly—and catch the light with which each of the film’s actors seems to glow. The filmmaker appears to allow the performances an unusual degree of freedom to create their actions in front of the camera, but the images never seem either subordinate to performance or constraining of it. Rather, the actors give freely of themselves (Gosling’s self-conscious whimsy adds some notable moments of comedy), while the camera, in sharp attention to gestures, glances, textures, and faces, and by way of some soul-shuddering closeups, gets past mere performance to the seeming core of character.

 

Brody-song-to-song-1200x630-1489689073.j

 

“Song to Song” offers a dazzling profusion of perspectives and angles, in some of the most radically inflected points of view since the heyday of Dziga Vertov. Malick brings his characters to a sharply varied range of places and spaces (with special attention to Austin and its surroundings), evoking a wide realm of experiences through architecture and décor. (The movie owes much to the production designer Jack Fisk, one of Malick’s key collaborators ever since his first film, “Badlands,” from 1973.) These images mesh and clash in a vast mental space that’s defined by the film’s mosaic-like editing. (No other recent film has as intricate and original an editing scheme.) The characters’ lines of dialogue are spoken, most often in voice-over, holding the narrative together and pushing it ahead while allowing the images to flow in an associative freedom that makes almost all other movies look, by comparison, like the stodgiest vestiges of filmed theatre.

 

As in his previous film, “Knight of Cups,” Malick makes art—his art—the subject of the film. By centering “Song to Song” on young artists struggling to find their way into the business and into their own finest vein of creation—while they’re also struggling to find their way into the world and make the intimate connections of which they dream—Malick catches life at its most dynamic and its most unstable. The boundless aspirations and ardors of young people are themselves the core of his romanticism. Without nostalgia and without sentimentality, this seventy-three-year-old filmmaker looks to the heart of his own inspiration, his own impulses, and creates a cinema that, with the creative command of his own life experience, feels more exuberantly youthful than that of most Sundance phenoms.

Is it another musical with Gosling, ala La La Land?



#24 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:42 AM

 

#PiratesOfTheCaribbean sails into first place at the box office: http://share.ew.com/Y88VLR7 

 

DA78B1EXcAEuOr5.jpg

 

Why-(obvious reasons) the incredibally talented 3 time Oscar contender Johnny Depp keeps churning these out though?  I know it's supposed to be the final in the franchise. it's just that he's done so much more & shoulda' moved on after #3 maybe?  what do I know  I do know one thing, he was robbed of a 4th nod for "Black Mass" ($50m.)

Amazing contrasts in his roles too.   "Benny & Joon" "Ed Wood" "Edward Scissorhands" "Whitey" Bulgar, "Alice in wonderland" even "Harry & Tonto" & alledgedly he had a stronger role as :Lerner in "Platoon' but Oliver stone edited some of his scenes done, so he didn't appear closer to Charlie Sheen's leading character.



#25 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:36 AM

 

This just in: #WonderWoman is the best-reviewed #DC movie since 'The Dark Knight'! http://share.ew.com/gs1ZmnC  WW_Emojiv3.png

DBFaIOtXsAQIm47.jpg

 

 

Jakeem, I for one love the huge poster images & such! :D  :D  :D



#26 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:35 AM

WOW!   A GOOD SCOOP,etc

(TRIVIA: Some fun fax on Sofia Coppola, obviously a superior director then actress. Her role in 1990's "Godfather, Part III" ($67m.) (***)

was always slated for one of my favorite gals WINONA RYDER instead.

Sofia obviously found her mark though)



#27 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:32 AM

 

Po8lHinI_bigger.jpegHollywood ReporterVerified account @THR

Following
More

Box-Office Milestone: #BeautyandtheBeast Twirls Past $500M in the U.S. http://thr.cm/c288nT 

DA8C6H-XYAMhcfl.jpg

 

 

Jakeem, doesn't that rate it at #7 to date now



#28 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:31 AM

 

SOFIA COPPOLA WINS BEST DIRECTOR! She becomes the second female filmmaker in history to win: http://bit.ly/2qwG5Kv  #Cannes2017Cannes_Film_Emoji.png

DA7z4KkXcAEMeH3.png

 

WOW!   A GOOD SCOOP,etc



#29 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:30 AM

On Monday, I saw my first movie of 2017, Song to Song.  Here is Richard Brody's review from his New Yorker blog:

 

Terrence Malick is a romantic idealist. His films revel in the unity of the virtues, of beauty, truth, and justice fused in an ultimate realm that leaves its glimmers on Earth and finds its ordinary place amid humanity in the form of love. Even more than his flowing, fragmentary, allusive methods, it’s his transcendental world view that renders him grandly untimely, that makes critics who are smitten with television’s cynical “darkness” repudiate the cathedral-like sublimity of his vision.

 

In his new film, “Song to Song,” Malick does something new with his familiar technique: he builds his cathedral from the ground up, filming mainly in his home town of Austin, Texas, and anchoring the movie on a starkly clear framework—a simple story of couples in doubt and conflict. But within his story of a shifting romantic triangle he develops both a teeming, harshly emotional web of relationships and an overwhelming, rapturous variety of visual experience. Forging under pressure a new way of telling familiar (and family) stories, Malick also displays a conspicuously painterly boldness, a sort of cinematic Impressionism that locates an indelible force of light and detail in the stuff of daily life.

 

umpv_06749_r_crop.jpg?w=780

 

It’s common practice when writing about a movie to offer at least a sketch of the plot; with “Song to Song,” that banality becomes an act of criticism—and of enthusiasm—in itself. That’s because, despite Malick’s daringly collage-like assemblage of images that only dart across the surfaces of their narrative elements, the movie has a rich, complex, thoroughly imagined plot of a novelistic amplitude. Going into detail about the story is, above all, proof that the movie has a story—that Malick is not a captive of his finely crafted style but, rather, able to deploy it to realize a dramatically engrossing world.

 

The names of the movie’s characters aren’t mentioned, with the exception of its protagonist, Faye (Rooney Mara), who’s pursuing a career in music and lands in a relationship with the record-company mogul (Michael Fassbender) for whom she had been working as a receptionist. With him, she has gotten used to a life of comfort, but she’s not doing much with music. At a party, Faye meets another young Austin musician (Ryan Gosling), who is something of the impresario’s protégé—he’s signed to a deal and being groomed for stardom—and she, the musician, and the mogul become something of a “Jules and Jim”-like trio, jetting off to Mexico in the rich man’s private plane and cavorting freely on the beach. But on that Mexico jaunt Faye—during a side trip to an abandoned monastery—realizes that she has fallen in love with the young man, and this becomes painfully clear to the mogul. Soon after the return to Austin, the mogul shamelessly flirts with a waitress (Natalie Portman), a former kindergarten teacher down on her luck, and eventually they marry.

 

 

song-to-song-STS_FP_081_rgb.jpg

On the basis of this classic setup of an unstable triangle, Malick goes on to build a wide and passionate tangle of new relationships and long-standing bonds. The mogul’s dealings with the young man fall apart, but the mogul and Faye aren’t done with each other; they still have a sexual relationship—and he offers her a record contract. Faye and the young musician break up; he meets a former girlfriend (Lykke Li) and gets involved with a socialite (Cate Blanchett), whom he meets at another fancy party. Faye gets involved with a Parisian artist (Bérénice Marlohe), whom she meets by chance. The mogul, despite being married, frequents prostitutes (one of whom, played by Jaylen Jones, speaks insightfully about her work) and drives his wife to despair. And, through the turmoil of erotic and professional distractions, Faye and the young musician (Gosling) find each other again. While the romantic entanglements tighten and slacken, the lovers’ families are woven among them. One of the movie’s strongest presences is the waitress’s mother, played by Holly Hunter, who delivers lines that ring like hammer blows: “You need money for a lawyer; the law’s no help for people who are ruined.” Linda Emond also plays a key and memorable role as the mother of the young musician, and, as Faye’s father, Brady Coleman invests just a few lines and glances with a deep, world-worn wisdom.

The music world is also woven into the story, with a sharp and self-deprecating backstage anecdote delivered by Iggy Pop, and, above all, with the recurring, majestic presence of Patti Smith, as herself, who serves as a mentor to Faye and as the movie’s tough-mindedly romantic philosophical conscience. “Song to Song” is filled with music, both applied to the soundtrack and performed onscreen by musicians and actors, and the spontaneous bursts of dance that arise, whether at parties or onstage, in a crowd or during isolated moments of flirtation and courtship, give the movie the feel of a musical, one in which the music arises from within and emerges in action.

 

Malick brings this mighty story to life in a copious array of images of a breathtakingly generous, gentle beauty. The cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki creates plunging, whirling, beatifically graceful, seemingly borderless images that gather light lovingly and avidly—and catch the light with which each of the film’s actors seems to glow. The filmmaker appears to allow the performances an unusual degree of freedom to create their actions in front of the camera, but the images never seem either subordinate to performance or constraining of it. Rather, the actors give freely of themselves (Gosling’s self-conscious whimsy adds some notable moments of comedy), while the camera, in sharp attention to gestures, glances, textures, and faces, and by way of some soul-shuddering closeups, gets past mere performance to the seeming core of character.

 

Brody-song-to-song-1200x630-1489689073.j

 

“Song to Song” offers a dazzling profusion of perspectives and angles, in some of the most radically inflected points of view since the heyday of Dziga Vertov. Malick brings his characters to a sharply varied range of places and spaces (with special attention to Austin and its surroundings), evoking a wide realm of experiences through architecture and décor. (The movie owes much to the production designer Jack Fisk, one of Malick’s key collaborators ever since his first film, “Badlands,” from 1973.) These images mesh and clash in a vast mental space that’s defined by the film’s mosaic-like editing. (No other recent film has as intricate and original an editing scheme.) The characters’ lines of dialogue are spoken, most often in voice-over, holding the narrative together and pushing it ahead while allowing the images to flow in an associative freedom that makes almost all other movies look, by comparison, like the stodgiest vestiges of filmed theatre.

 

As in his previous film, “Knight of Cups,” Malick makes art—his art—the subject of the film. By centering “Song to Song” on young artists struggling to find their way into the business and into their own finest vein of creation—while they’re also struggling to find their way into the world and make the intimate connections of which they dream—Malick catches life at its most dynamic and its most unstable. The boundless aspirations and ardors of young people are themselves the core of his romanticism. Without nostalgia and without sentimentality, this seventy-three-year-old filmmaker looks to the heart of his own inspiration, his own impulses, and creates a cinema that, with the creative command of his own life experience, feels more exuberantly youthful than that of most Sundance phenoms.

Skimpole, you got me & possibly some others here  I didn't even know Malick had this picture coming up already.

 

His sole shot-(not that that always matters) at The Golden Boy so far was his massive WW2 epic from

98 "The Thin Red Line" ($36m.)  which had the misfortune come Oscar time of going up against Spielberg's WW11 epic "Pvt. Ryan"



#30 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:27 AM

Kate's among the top 3 to5 finest actresses today!

Has anyone else also heard that Elba may be the next James Bond?



#31 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:26 AM

 

nXXMBdhA_bigger.jpgEntertainment Weekly@EW

 
More

The trailer for @MountainBetween strands @IdrisElba and Kate Winslet among snowy mountains with little hope: http://share.ew.com/vYPyFYS 

 

DBKVbgzUAAAIKE_.jpg

 

 

Kate's among the top 3 to5 finest actresses today!


  • ChristineHoard likes this

#32 spence

spence

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • LocationTampa Bay, FL

Posted 04 June 2017 - 02:25 AM

 

Box Office: #WonderWoman Lassoing $95M-Plus Debut http://thr.cm/QVfDNP WW_Emojiv3.png

DBZxtTCWAAAJXA3.jpg

 

 

After going to between (36 & 60) new releases in a theater since 1982 when I was still a young lad, I am so burnt on comics, sequels, remakes,etc   The state of Hollywoods new products is pathetic, though immensely huge $$$ wise of course & why they keep doing it, over, over, over & over.



#33 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 03 June 2017 - 09:24 AM

Box Office: #WonderWoman Lassoing $95M-Plus Debut http://thr.cm/QVfDNP WW_Emojiv3.png

DBZxtTCWAAAJXA3.jpg

 



#34 TikiSoo

TikiSoo

    sprockethole

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,809 posts
  • LocationSyracuse, NY

Posted 02 June 2017 - 04:45 AM

Please don't devolve yet another thread into a poster board linked vortex of OTHER PEOPLES opinions.

 

We'd like to know what YOU think, not some webpage.



#35 skimpole

skimpole

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,351 posts

Posted 01 June 2017 - 09:37 PM

On Monday, I saw my first movie of 2017, Song to Song.  Here is Richard Brody's review from his New Yorker blog:

 

Terrence Malick is a romantic idealist. His films revel in the unity of the virtues, of beauty, truth, and justice fused in an ultimate realm that leaves its glimmers on Earth and finds its ordinary place amid humanity in the form of love. Even more than his flowing, fragmentary, allusive methods, it’s his transcendental world view that renders him grandly untimely, that makes critics who are smitten with television’s cynical “darkness” repudiate the cathedral-like sublimity of his vision.

 

In his new film, “Song to Song,” Malick does something new with his familiar technique: he builds his cathedral from the ground up, filming mainly in his home town of Austin, Texas, and anchoring the movie on a starkly clear framework—a simple story of couples in doubt and conflict. But within his story of a shifting romantic triangle he develops both a teeming, harshly emotional web of relationships and an overwhelming, rapturous variety of visual experience. Forging under pressure a new way of telling familiar (and family) stories, Malick also displays a conspicuously painterly boldness, a sort of cinematic Impressionism that locates an indelible force of light and detail in the stuff of daily life.

 

umpv_06749_r_crop.jpg?w=780

 

It’s common practice when writing about a movie to offer at least a sketch of the plot; with “Song to Song,” that banality becomes an act of criticism—and of enthusiasm—in itself. That’s because, despite Malick’s daringly collage-like assemblage of images that only dart across the surfaces of their narrative elements, the movie has a rich, complex, thoroughly imagined plot of a novelistic amplitude. Going into detail about the story is, above all, proof that the movie has a story—that Malick is not a captive of his finely crafted style but, rather, able to deploy it to realize a dramatically engrossing world.

 

The names of the movie’s characters aren’t mentioned, with the exception of its protagonist, Faye (Rooney Mara), who’s pursuing a career in music and lands in a relationship with the record-company mogul (Michael Fassbender) for whom she had been working as a receptionist. With him, she has gotten used to a life of comfort, but she’s not doing much with music. At a party, Faye meets another young Austin musician (Ryan Gosling), who is something of the impresario’s protégé—he’s signed to a deal and being groomed for stardom—and she, the musician, and the mogul become something of a “Jules and Jim”-like trio, jetting off to Mexico in the rich man’s private plane and cavorting freely on the beach. But on that Mexico jaunt Faye—during a side trip to an abandoned monastery—realizes that she has fallen in love with the young man, and this becomes painfully clear to the mogul. Soon after the return to Austin, the mogul shamelessly flirts with a waitress (Natalie Portman), a former kindergarten teacher down on her luck, and eventually they marry.

 

 

song-to-song-STS_FP_081_rgb.jpg

On the basis of this classic setup of an unstable triangle, Malick goes on to build a wide and passionate tangle of new relationships and long-standing bonds. The mogul’s dealings with the young man fall apart, but the mogul and Faye aren’t done with each other; they still have a sexual relationship—and he offers her a record contract. Faye and the young musician break up; he meets a former girlfriend (Lykke Li) and gets involved with a socialite (Cate Blanchett), whom he meets at another fancy party. Faye gets involved with a Parisian artist (Bérénice Marlohe), whom she meets by chance. The mogul, despite being married, frequents prostitutes (one of whom, played by Jaylen Jones, speaks insightfully about her work) and drives his wife to despair. And, through the turmoil of erotic and professional distractions, Faye and the young musician (Gosling) find each other again. While the romantic entanglements tighten and slacken, the lovers’ families are woven among them. One of the movie’s strongest presences is the waitress’s mother, played by Holly Hunter, who delivers lines that ring like hammer blows: “You need money for a lawyer; the law’s no help for people who are ruined.” Linda Emond also plays a key and memorable role as the mother of the young musician, and, as Faye’s father, Brady Coleman invests just a few lines and glances with a deep, world-worn wisdom.

The music world is also woven into the story, with a sharp and self-deprecating backstage anecdote delivered by Iggy Pop, and, above all, with the recurring, majestic presence of Patti Smith, as herself, who serves as a mentor to Faye and as the movie’s tough-mindedly romantic philosophical conscience. “Song to Song” is filled with music, both applied to the soundtrack and performed onscreen by musicians and actors, and the spontaneous bursts of dance that arise, whether at parties or onstage, in a crowd or during isolated moments of flirtation and courtship, give the movie the feel of a musical, one in which the music arises from within and emerges in action.

 

Malick brings this mighty story to life in a copious array of images of a breathtakingly generous, gentle beauty. The cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki creates plunging, whirling, beatifically graceful, seemingly borderless images that gather light lovingly and avidly—and catch the light with which each of the film’s actors seems to glow. The filmmaker appears to allow the performances an unusual degree of freedom to create their actions in front of the camera, but the images never seem either subordinate to performance or constraining of it. Rather, the actors give freely of themselves (Gosling’s self-conscious whimsy adds some notable moments of comedy), while the camera, in sharp attention to gestures, glances, textures, and faces, and by way of some soul-shuddering closeups, gets past mere performance to the seeming core of character.

 

Brody-song-to-song-1200x630-1489689073.j

 

“Song to Song” offers a dazzling profusion of perspectives and angles, in some of the most radically inflected points of view since the heyday of Dziga Vertov. Malick brings his characters to a sharply varied range of places and spaces (with special attention to Austin and its surroundings), evoking a wide realm of experiences through architecture and décor. (The movie owes much to the production designer Jack Fisk, one of Malick’s key collaborators ever since his first film, “Badlands,” from 1973.) These images mesh and clash in a vast mental space that’s defined by the film’s mosaic-like editing. (No other recent film has as intricate and original an editing scheme.) The characters’ lines of dialogue are spoken, most often in voice-over, holding the narrative together and pushing it ahead while allowing the images to flow in an associative freedom that makes almost all other movies look, by comparison, like the stodgiest vestiges of filmed theatre.

 

As in his previous film, “Knight of Cups,” Malick makes art—his art—the subject of the film. By centering “Song to Song” on young artists struggling to find their way into the business and into their own finest vein of creation—while they’re also struggling to find their way into the world and make the intimate connections of which they dream—Malick catches life at its most dynamic and its most unstable. The boundless aspirations and ardors of young people are themselves the core of his romanticism. Without nostalgia and without sentimentality, this seventy-three-year-old filmmaker looks to the heart of his own inspiration, his own impulses, and creates a cinema that, with the creative command of his own life experience, feels more exuberantly youthful than that of most Sundance phenoms.



#36 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 31 May 2017 - 11:18 AM

hEgeAGO8_bigger.jpgEntertainment Weekly@EW

 
More

The trailer for @MountainBetween strands @IdrisElba and Kate Winslet among snowy mountains with little hope: http://share.ew.com/vYPyFYS 

 

DBKVbgzUAAAIKE_.jpg

 



#37 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 30 May 2017 - 12:20 PM

This just in: #WonderWoman is the best-reviewed #DC movie since 'The Dark Knight'! http://share.ew.com/gs1ZmnC  WW_Emojiv3.png

DBFaIOtXsAQIm47.jpg

 



#38 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 30 May 2017 - 11:35 AM

Jessica Chastain slams #Cannes films for their "disturbing" representation of women: http://share.ew.com/Z4qCF8M 

 

DBEvcNyVYAA1U8Z.jpg

 

 



#39 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 29 May 2017 - 07:39 AM

#FateoftheFurious muscles past a major box office milestone ... http://bit.ly/2s3Qzmk 

DA8D-KpVYAAzQcH.jpg

 



#40 jakeem

jakeem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,353 posts
  • Location: Atlanta

Posted 28 May 2017 - 06:21 PM

SOFIA COPPOLA WINS BEST DIRECTOR! She becomes the second female filmmaker in history to win: http://bit.ly/2qwG5Kv  #Cannes2017Cannes_Film_Emoji.png

DA7z4KkXcAEMeH3.png


  • spence likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users