Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

An ongoing project to survey the best films of individual decades, genres, and filmmakers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#51 Post by Rayon Vert » Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:47 am

zedz wrote:I take your point, but as I recall (over several decades!), by that stage of the film Waterson's character isn't driving the plot at all, but rather taking the classic supporting role of watching and waiting. In terms of the dramatic action of the film, I don't see him as a co-lead any more.
I'll buy that.


User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#53 Post by Lost Highway » Tue Jan 30, 2018 2:13 pm

Truffaut‘s other biopic apart from Adele H. was L’Enfant sauvage/The Wild Child, a biopic about two historical figures.

I enjoyed the dream sequences in John Hustons‘s Freud: A Secret Passion and Clift’s performannce even though I think Freud himself was a fraud.

My member name requires me to mention The Elephant Man, though I’ve never been a fan of The Straight Story.

I suppose The Conjuring movies qualify the same way any biopic about a biblical character does.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#54 Post by zedz » Tue Jan 30, 2018 2:52 pm

Lost Highway wrote:My member name requires me to mention The Elephant Man, though I’ve never been a fan of The Straight Story.
The Straight Story is one that would never have crossed my mind, so thanks for mentioning it!

John Shade
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:04 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#55 Post by John Shade » Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:53 pm

I'm going to finally try and give a good participation in a lists project. Some that I've seen very recently:

The Song of Bernadette: This is a personal favorite of mine and I caught it again on TCM during Christmas season. I don't know which aspect to praise, and I wonder if I should go in more depth. Jennifer Jones obviously gives a great, emotional performance. It definitely builds to that powerful conversation scene between the nuns about suffering and God's will. Aside from a Bresson or Tarkovsky, or maybe Dreyer's Joan of Arc, this is one of the great Christian films/biopics.

Quiz Show: For some reason this was shown during my high school film class. I was able to catch it again recently. An entertaining enough movie; what sticks out for me is my teacher saying that the movie spends all this time building up a kind of moral outrage, which is somewhat unwarranted, and then dumping it on the Fiennes character. I like the scene between Rob Morrow and Fiennes on a boat discussing how they could popularize intellectualism in an anti-intellectual culture.

Moneyball: Another recent tv rewatch, and another movie that attempts to dramatize something that might not seem dramatic. Typing this all that sticks out to me is the repeated guitar (somewhat Explosions in the Sky-like?) that happens throughout the movie; still it makes stats nerds look cool, and the Spike Jonze character/cameo was still funny. Probably not as good as people thought it was a few years ago.

Julie and Julia: I liked this movie; it does exactly what it sets out to do by portraying some romanticized version of France and the French, with Child picking up on both their eccentricities and their cuisine. Then there are the Amy Adams bits interspersed which are somewhat enjoyable. The movie probably could have just been a Merryl Streep performance, but the Amy Adams part, if nothing else, at least makes me want to try some of these dishes. This and Moneyball are not quite list-worthy and I don't really think should be sought out. Just easy viewing on Starz.

Edit: Want to add that on Jeopardy the other night the category was "Myopic Biopic". Braveheart, Sid and Nancy, All Eyez on Me, and a Tony Curtiz Houdini movie were some mentioned, but no Quiz Show.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#56 Post by matrixschmatrix » Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:16 pm

"Myopic Biopic" doesn't rhyme in an infuriating way

John Shade
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:04 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#57 Post by John Shade » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:06 am

An important aspect of some of these films does deal with myth-making. I was wondering if Malick's The New World fits as a "biopic"? It's definitely approaching a story with already mythic status and adding to it; he approaches it with an aim at realism (only using bird-sounds that he knows are from that time and region; Native American and English clothing, etc.). How much of the story there does he stretch? Is the story itself so scant that it basically calls to be stretched out? I think of it as one of Malick's best precisely because there is already a story with common associations/ideas, so he's free to explore it with his 2000s style.

Similarly, when I think of biopics my first thought is Amadeus. This is another case of an almost mythical approach. The Pushkin source material is seemingly more allegory than biography, but I think the aim of that movie, and what most of the general public takes it for, is a biopic of both Mozart and Salieri.

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#58 Post by jindianajonz » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:01 am

John Shade wrote:An important aspect of some of these films does deal with myth-making. I was wondering if Malick's The New World fits as a "biopic"?
It's listed as such in the first post

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#59 Post by knives » Fri Feb 02, 2018 1:55 am

Mangal Pandey: The Rising
To get the cheap stuff out of the way first for this very interesting if not great film it's interesting that Aamir Khan doesn't get a proper song in this one especially in light of how this even feels like his biggest role. He gets a noticeable part in one song, but even that is pretty small for his role. Most of the music is song by a chorus on elephant, and done in a modern way that clashes with the setting somewhat. A few characters get their own songs though and they actually work out much better.

Beyond that the film has a very unique point of view as biography. It's less concerned with the particulars of Pandey's life (beyond his place in history not much real feels present) than with how he is remembered and the pain that still has at least for the Indian people (I don't know, perhaps for the English it is different). Right from the beginning Mehta sets up the question of how to view this event: as a rebellion or a war of independence. While much of the film, of course, deals with very specific Indian problems (in film the rebellion is set off in part because of how interacting with the British makes Pandey reassess the caste system) a lot of it films transferable to many national stories. It comes across as especially important nowadays in light of Poland's Holocaust denial through the boycotting of the film Aftermath and the law that is traveling through their congress right now. Pandey as a figure is much more sympathetic than that, but Khan develops his performance in a way that makes him less than the heroic legend that it seems like India venerates him as (and it sounds like that approach was effective in ruffling nationalist feathers too).

It is easy to view the rebellion as a war for independence rather than a mutiny as the film broadly sets up the audience to think on, but that seems food for the Europeans in the audience to eat. Much more devastatingly the film seems to ask its real audience how much of a hero is Pandey in comparison of the truly heroic force that he unleashed. It is not shocking that the film ends with Gandhi both because it is a close on this story of independence and also because of how different Gandhi's war was as well as its greater success. In American terms, because I just have to be totally ego driven even with as compelling a subject as this one, its almost like the question of Malcolm X in relation to Dr. King. Though that element is more tertiary and there more to highlight that Pandey was human with his method failing being one example.

The biggest example, and the one the film is the most concerned with, is Pandey's (and by extension India's) own relation with the English. While respectable in a lot of ways in order to survive Pandey has to play as an Uncle Tom with his trust of the English ultimately making him an outcast(e) not part of any world. That produces another interesting element to the film as it makes a strong argument that a lot of traditional Indian society is wrong and did genuinely require change which the British provided even as they brought a vile tyranny along with that progress. The film discusses quite in depth the flaw of the caste system, but more viscerally the burning of a living widow with her dead husband is made really uncomfortable even beyond the obvious reasons why and is explicitly tied to Indian identity in a shame filled way. There are so many ways the film says this is an imperfect man representing an imperfect society which need to change, that nonetheless deserve the freedom to accomplish that independently.

When I rented this film I expected some mindless bit of patriotism, but instead, in how and long Bollywood fashion, I got a reasonably complex treatment on the purpose of nationalism.

Set Fire to the Stars
I know about as little as there is to know on Dylan Thomas, but this film paints him in a way that could have been overly coy or annoying (his introduction is down right Hunter S Thompsonesque) but ultimately proves to be sad in a beautiful way. Occasionally with regard to the letter the film does get too cute and the score hurts the film. It's overly sentimental behind the artistic-intellectual face, but that fits well with its Thomas who is something like a DFW pretending to be Thompson. It also has a childlike innocence in its idea of America that goes fully into childhood when Shirley Henderson and husband show up.

The aesthetic of the film is quite nice too. Superior to the script in a way that is obvious. It takes a lot from early Sally Potter utilizing exaggerated space for both humour and psychological emphasis. The script itself doesn't show much in the way of experimentation, but the editing and production design do in a consistently successful way that make me excited for Andy Goddard as a new voice. There's actually a lot of overlap here with The Broken Tower, but this is more intelligently planned and more successful overall in its odd turns (though Goddard cutting to Wood and playing terrible music over Jones' reading is a pretty terrible alternative to Franco's equivalent scene).

Apparently there was another Thomas in New York film featuring Jones in a small role made the same year which is just an odd thing to consider.

My Apprenticeship a.k.a. Maxim Gorky II
It's fairly clear why this isn't as popular as the first film as though it is a swift and entertaining watch it is ultimately too streamlined and simple to have the same level of impact. The film shows various jobs Gorky had as he was slowly growing into an adult. This provides some interest in that Russia remains a cruel place full of selfish and ignorant people who through that cruelty help mold Gorky into a more moral individual. In a lot of ways there is significant overlap here with Andrei Rublev as the misery of Russia highlights the importance and dangers of art. There's even a scene that could easily have been found in Tarkovsky's film. There has been a laundress that has been very kind to Gorky at his first apprenticeship. Two drunkards get into a fight with one knocking the other out. The laundress and Gorky help the knocked out man recover and eventually have a cute laugh over it. It turns out the man's purse is missing and she comes to believe Gorky has stolen it. She drags him by the ear to his abusive employers as he swears he didn't steal. He gets beat for his troubles. As he is getting beat it the purse is found and it turns out to have fallen because of a whole in the man's pants. The laundress, feeling bad about her mistake, explains to the employer. She responds that he isn't being beaten over the purse, but for swearing. It's a powerful scene that summarizes the themes in an extremely effective way and if Donsky maintained that throughout the film could have been the first's superior. Instead he focuses in a small and undifferentiated scenes that push Gorky toward being Gorky giving the film the weird sense of being filler. This rudderless feeling is probably caused by a lack of character to hold the film together. As the genre tends to hold Gorky himself isn't that active and interesting, as was the case in the first film, being instead an object to observe through or be acted upon. How the first film overcame this was tying Gorky to other characters such as his grandparents who are conventionally compelling and unique. This second film is too transitory to hold onto characters that way as Gorky moves from one story to the next leaving no room for character punches.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#60 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:20 am

knives wrote:Set Fire to the Stars
I know about as little as there is to know on Dylan Thomas, but this film paints him in a way that could have been overly coy or annoying (his introduction is down right Hunter S Thompsonesque) but ultimately proves to be sad in a beautiful way. Occasionally with regard to the letter the film does get too cute and the score hurts the film. It's overly sentimental behind the artistic-intellectual face, but that fits well with its Thomas who is something like a DFW pretending to be Thompson. It also has a childlike innocence in its idea of America that goes fully into childhood when Shirley Henderson and husband show up.

The aesthetic of the film is quite nice too. Superior to the script in a way that is obvious. It takes a lot from early Sally Potter utilizing exaggerated space for both humour and psychological emphasis. The script itself doesn't show much in the way of experimentation, but the editing and production design do in a consistently successful way that make me excited for Andy Goddard as a new voice. There's actually a lot of overlap here with The Broken Tower, but this is more intelligently planned and more successful overall in its odd turns (though Goddard cutting to Wood and playing terrible music over Jones' reading is a pretty terrible alternative to Franco's equivalent scene).
Would you have any clue as to why this film rates only 5.8 overall on IMDB while getting almost only 9s or 10s in the individual review posts on that same site? Your write-up of The Better Angels had me check that one also on IMDB, but there it was a bit more clear as to why some viewers were turned off (and the overall score low) where others were overwhelmed (i.e. the meditative, poetic quality of the film). I'll try to check the latter one out if I've exhausted my viewing load before the project's end.
Last edited by Rayon Vert on Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#61 Post by domino harvey » Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:23 am

I quite like the Better Angels too and forgot it was a biopic! I enjoyed most how the film made alien the basic day-to-day life of living a frontier-style life, and the performances of Lincoln's family members are effective, especially Jason Clarke's complex characterization as the father

John Shade: the Song of Bernadette is a pretty comfortable number two on my list, glad to hear someone else will be ranking it highly
Lost Highway wrote:I enjoyed the dream sequences in John Hustons‘s Freud: A Secret Passion and Clift’s performannce even though I think Freud himself was a fraud.
I've talked about this before somewhere on the board but I think Huston's film makes a real error in ending right where it should begin, with the virulent reaction to Freud's most outlandish claims and subsequent rejection of his peers. It's a great scene but the silly soap opera approach that preceded it wasn't worth wading through

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#62 Post by knives » Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:35 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:
knives wrote:Set Fire to the Stars
I know about as little as there is to know on Dylan Thomas, but this film paints him in a way that could have been overly coy or annoying (his introduction is down right Hunter S Thompsonesque) but ultimately proves to be sad in a beautiful way. Occasionally with regard to the letter the film does get too cute and the score hurts the film. It's overly sentimental behind the artistic-intellectual face, but that fits well with its Thomas who is something like a DFW pretending to be Thompson. It also has a childlike innocence in its idea of America that goes fully into childhood when Shirley Henderson and husband show up.

The aesthetic of the film is quite nice too. Superior to the script in a way that is obvious. It takes a lot from early Sally Potter utilizing exaggerated space for both humour and psychological emphasis. The script itself doesn't show much in the way of experimentation, but the editing and production design do in a consistently successful way that make me excited for Andy Goddard as a new voice. There's actually a lot of overlap here with The Broken Tower, but this is more intelligently planned and more successful overall in its odd turns (though Goddard cutting to Wood and playing terrible music over Jones' reading is a pretty terrible alternative to Franco's equivalent scene).
Would you have any clue as to why this film rates only 5.8 overall on IMDB while getting almost only 9s or 10s in the individual review posts on that same site? Your write-up of The Better Angels had me check that one also on IMDB, but there it was a bit more clear as to why some viewers were turned off (and the overall score low) where others were overwhelmed (i.e. the meditative, poetic quality of the film). I'll try to check the latter one out if I've exhausted my viewing load before the project's end.
I've got no clue to be honest. At best I can assume that while it doesn't illicit an extreme negative reaction it may wind up providing a shrugging one regularly with a small, but vocal crowd loving it.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#63 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:10 pm

The Story of Louis Pasteur (Dieterle 1936). This is quite the Oscar-friendly genre. This one seems to have started a small string of Paul Muni & William Dieterle biopic partnerships for the brothers Warner. The facts of this story, which I really didn’t know well, are interesting and often really surprising from our modern viewpoint (e.g. Napoleon III ordering Pasteur to stop his work, Dr. Charbonnet jamming a rabies needle in his arm to prove his point that Pasteur’s ideas are rot). Nevertheless I thought this was competent and a worthwhile watch but not all that remarkable – nowhere near the later Madame Curie, say. Although the episode with the sheep was fun.


Walk the Line (Mangold 2005). The leads are good enough, as I suppose, with Witherspoon definitely standing out, and the relationship aspect was unarguably the best part of the film. Unfortunately, despite some good scenes this was quite predictable and felt too much by-the-numbers - I usually am not tempted to see music star biopics in the first place because that’s exactly what I expect/apprehend. And in this case the film doesn’t make the viewer feel much emotion towards Cash and doesn’t make one come away with an appreciation of the man’s genius.


The Barretts of Wimpole Street (Franklin 1934). Browning (Fredric March) pitches woo at Elizabeth Barrett (Shearer), locked up in her family’s house as an invalid. But the real story is Miss Barrett’s journey towards confronting her tyrannical father. Laughton successfully cuts a frightening and hateful figure here. A middling film gets better towards the end as the confrontation comes to pass. Worth a watch if you happen to come across it, but not much than that.


Sybil (Petrie 1976). I’ve got it on good authority that this is an accurate portrayal of DID. This is certainly one of the best filmic representations of extensive psychological treatment I’ve seen, and a heartening one in terms of the psychiatrist’s devotion and humanness. Field is definitely a revelation here, and Joanne Woodward is very good as well. The scenes between Sybil (or her alters) and Brad Davis (who, in real life, it turns out, was severely abused himself by his parents as a child) have got some real sweetness to them. It still has the feel of a television production, but there’s some kind of art here too. It’s actually surprising that something of this depth, and with some of the content involved (particularly atrocious abuse revealed in the end), was made for prime time in those years.


The Life of Emile Zola (Dieterle 1937). Dieterle-Muni No. 2. I was expecting the film to focus exclusively on the Dreyfus affair, so I was pleasantly surprised there was a small chunk of the film at the front end establishing the writer as a great novelist, and his reputation through those works as a social critic. However I don’t see anything here justifying this as a great or Best Picture-worthy film. It strangely, on occasion, feels a little amateurish, like a scene of Dreyfus on Devil’s Island screaming he’s innocent when he’s been there 3 years (!), as well as some over-the-top acting, including on Muni’s part. But then the Dreyfus court case really does have some power to it and gets you involved. (The Wiki entry notes that recent critics have qualified WB’s progressivism in the release of this film by the fact that the film doesn’t mention “Jew” or “anti-Semitism”, but I will note that when the officer Dreyfus is “discovered” to have committed treason, a shot showing a card with his key attributes clearly puts the focus on his Judaism).
Image


Papillon (Schaffner 1973). Speaking of Devil’s Island (strange coincidence that I watched these movies back to back – plus there’s even a mention of Dreyfus at the end). Another big classic I happen to have never caught before. I expected this to be grittier. Despite the at times horrendous circumstances, there’s a sense of fun adventure through it all, like an updated The Great Escape for the 70s. It’s still a hell of an odyssey though, and where the film ends up in the last bit has nice surreal flavor that ends the film quite nicely. A potential contender for me.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#64 Post by zedz » Sun Feb 04, 2018 6:55 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:Sybil (Petrie 1976). I’ve got it on good authority that this is an accurate portrayal of DID. This is certainly one of the best filmic representations of extensive psychological treatment I’ve seen, and a heartening one in terms of the psychiatrist’s devotion and humanness. Field is definitely a revelation here, and Joanne Woodward is very good as well. The scenes between Sybil (or her alters) and Brad Davis (who, in real life, it turns out, was severely abused himself by his parents as a child) have got some real sweetness to them. It still has the feel of a television production, but there’s some kind of art here too. It’s actually surprising that something of this depth, and with some of the content involved (particularly atrocious abuse revealed in the end), was made for prime time in those years.
I haven't seen it in years, and I don't recall it as anything special formally, but it's a film that is really powered along by its performances and seriousness. Woodward is really terrific in a tricky, unflashy role that has to anchor Field's pyrotechnics.

Since Sybil Dorsett is a pseudonym, it would have to qualify for this project as a biopic of Dr. Wilbur. (Though since I'm Not There apparently qualifies for inclusion, and it's a film in which none of its six main figures is called Bob Dylan, it's seems like this is a rule that only applies to A Man Escaped!)

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#65 Post by knives » Sun Feb 04, 2018 6:56 pm

...And Velvet Goldmine.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#66 Post by domino harvey » Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:35 pm

I haven't seen Sybil but while Woodward's perf may not be flashy, her casting certainly is: it's a clear callback to her own Oscar-winning take on multiple personality disorder in the Three Faces of Eve , only with her on the other side of it

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#67 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:32 pm

zedz wrote:
Rayon Vert wrote:Sybil (Petrie 1976). I’ve got it on good authority that this is an accurate portrayal of DID. This is certainly one of the best filmic representations of extensive psychological treatment I’ve seen, and a heartening one in terms of the psychiatrist’s devotion and humanness. Field is definitely a revelation here, and Joanne Woodward is very good as well. The scenes between Sybil (or her alters) and Brad Davis (who, in real life, it turns out, was severely abused himself by his parents as a child) have got some real sweetness to them. It still has the feel of a television production, but there’s some kind of art here too. It’s actually surprising that something of this depth, and with some of the content involved (particularly atrocious abuse revealed in the end), was made for prime time in those years.
Since Sybil Dorsett is a pseudonym, it would have to qualify for this project as a biopic of Dr. Wilbur.
I thought about that and in this case I would argue that it should count as a bio of "Sybil" (if that matters). The movie did not change the name in order to fictionalize the events, but was based on the book's use of a pseudonym in order to protect the identity of the patient (since disclosed).

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#68 Post by zedz » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:49 pm

I agree. Personally, I think it's an open and shut case of a biopic. I also think it's important to consider I'm Not There as a biopic, even though it violates just about every rule one could conceive to define the genre, because Haynes' entire project with that film is to revolutionise the form of that particular genre (as he did with Superstar). I just wish I liked the end result more so I could vote for it! However, I don't think Velvet Goldmine even comes close to being a biopic, despite it obviously forming a matched set with those other two films.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#69 Post by domino harvey » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 pm

I have no problem with Sybil making someone's list, since at the time of production that was the only name known for its subject. I don't like I'm Not Here either, but I'm going to say it is an exception to the rule on the strength of its other bonafides and its ultimate function. I'm willing to entertain other exceptions on a case by case basis, but please let's not turn this into another Deadwood: Season One

John Shade
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:04 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#70 Post by John Shade » Wed Feb 07, 2018 9:25 pm

What's the opinion on Techine's Brontes film? Should I seek that one out for this project?

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#71 Post by Rayon Vert » Wed Feb 07, 2018 9:29 pm

John Shade wrote:What's the opinion on Techine's Brontes film? Should I seek that one out for this project?
Really underwhelming for me. (Also, if it's 3 sisters, is it eligible?)

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#72 Post by zedz » Wed Feb 07, 2018 10:01 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:
John Shade wrote:What's the opinion on Techine's Brontes film? Should I seek that one out for this project?
Really underwhelming for me. (Also, if it's 3 sisters, is it eligible?)
I'm with you. I saw it back in the eighties when I was pretty indiscriminately gobbling up any foreign film that fell across my path, and even then I thought it was simultaneously bland and overwrought. Possibly a watershed "hey! some of these foreign films are pretty mediocre too!" developmental moment.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#73 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:06 pm

Cleopatra (DeMille 1934). An awkward mix of classic Paramount irony and eroticism and an earnest retelling of the usual Antony and Cleopatra story, including the Julius Caesar prelude, with Colbert playing Cleopatra as sex kitten. The point of interest is the very flashy and sexy costumes and sets but that’s not enough to override the dramatic dullness of the more serious elements’ execution.


The Rise of Catherine the Great (Czinner 1934). Given how much they have in common, I wonder if The Scarlet Empress, released later in the same year, was inspired by this? This isn’t a bad film at all – nice lightly comic and dramatic mixture, appealing sets, solid screenplay, and good performances especially by the actresses playing Catherine and the Empress Elizabeth. Kind of a shame that Sternberg’s film is superior to the point that this feels a little unnecessary by default.


Alexander Nevsky (Eisenstein & Vasilev 1938). I’ve never seen Eisenstein’s sound films as opposed to his silents so this seems like a good time to catch up. After seeing it, I’m not sure this really fits the bill for the project as Nevsky is more a figurehead than anything else. I didn’t warm up to the film immediately but the epic battle scene was indeed something else and the film’s strongly stylized visuals slowly won me over. The scenes with characters like Gavrilo and Buslai really help to humanize the film.


Le Scaphandre et le papillon (Schnabel 2007). I had trouble seeing the reason for the accolades. A man in a rare, debilitating condition, but I felt the film didn’t succeed in showing why we should care beyond that fact; it seemed to assume the sheer facts of the condition (and the fact that the protagonist wrote a book about it) generating special emotion. I have trouble warming up to Amalric, so maybe that’s part of the problem. I was left pretty much unmoved through all of it, and frankly a little bored after the initial POV section of the film, which in itself was interest-engaging but nothing more. All of the arty “1st person consciousness” visual flourishes weren’t enough to elevate the material.


Gandhi (Attenborough 1982). (revisit) I hadn’t seen it since close to the time it came out. My experience this time, for most of it, was feeling this was a very good film and quite the achievement, with not much to fault, but that something I couldn’t define was lacking for me to feel enthralled or to characterize it as a great film. (Maybe this had something to do with the limit to how much we can relate to someone who seems entirely defined by ideals, maybe something to do also with a conventional and a little bit predictable approach.) Kingsley’s performance is still special and iconic, the vistas when we get to India are very eye-catching and it’s an engaging film with a sure directorial hand pretty much most of the time.

In the last hour, though, I felt the film lost its wind a bit, corresponding with the easing up of the dramatic tension involved in India getting its independence as, just as WWII starts, it becomes obvious it’s eventually going to happen without much more struggle, and perhaps also with the danger of the Gandhi character starting to become a bit too saint-like and removed. But eventually the film managed to recover and actually attain its most moving moment at the end of the Hindu vs. Muslim riots portion of the film, especially in that scene where the bedridden Gandhi talks to a Hindu in agony who feels he’s going to hell because he’s killed a Muslim child. And the last notes of the film, after the tragedy, do achieve a genuine spiritual emotion note that prior to this had been the subject of a lot of talk but had not necessarily been achieved.

Btw, I recognized a young Daniel Day Lewis in a short scene as one of the racist South African hoodlums.


That Hamilton Woman (Korda 1941). (revisit) Another eligible Criterion release for this project. Not a perfect film but an overall winning production. Those scenes with Nelson and the war against Napoleon are obviously tailored for the historical context of the time, and they’re not a problem but they are somewhat at odds with the doomed love affair narrative. Olivier is creditable but it’s Leigh that really stands out here, as she delivers a truly spirited performance sustained through the entire film.


Van Gogh (Pialat 1991). Pialat is one of my blind spots. I had very high expectations going in and I came out a little disappointed because of that. There’s a hyperrealism going on, a great naturalness, with an almost complete absence of artifice, that is refreshing. There’s also a great beauty in some of the outdoor scenes especially, and Pialat really succeeds in making a period film feel as it was currently happening. And all of the women in the film were very good. On the other hand though the film was consistently interesting I wasn’t bewitched. Maybe one weaker spot partly responsible was Dutronc’s characterization of the painter, which sometimes felt a little too inert. Tim Roth in Vincent and Theo created a performance made up of a similar mixture of brooding, sometimes impassive introversion and sudden bursts of rage but there was a presence there that I didn’t always feel with the French actor. And as it happens, the Altman film has a number of touches that really strike my fancy and make it a clear favorite for me.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#74 Post by domino harvey » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:32 pm

I feel like DeMille's interest in unexpected sexualization was utilized much better in Sign of the Cross, in which we actually get a Colbert nude scene in the middle of our Christian movie!

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Biopics List Discussion + Suggestions (Genre Project)

#75 Post by Rayon Vert » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:01 am


Post Reply