It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:14 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Joel and Ethan Coen
PostPosted: Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:48 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Clooney to direct crime noir drama Suburbicon written by Coens

Doing a search online shows that it's been in development with the hope they themselves would direct it for several years now, so hopefully that means some harbinger of quality.


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:39 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Suburbicon is apparently another dud for Clooney behind the camera, though Oscar Isaac is getting raves for his brief role. Maybe he'll score a William Hurt in A History of Violence nod


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
...did people not like A History of Violence?

(I was always so confused why, after Clooney beat Hurt for Supporting Actor that year, he approached him and hugged him - until I realized that he was also in Syriana, a movie no one has thought about since 2006).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:52 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Sorry, my comment on that film was solely in reference to a super short supporting actor perf getting nominated. Still one of the greatest left-field Oscar noms ever


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:00 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:07 pm
Ribs wrote:
Syriana, a movie no one has thought about since 2006.

I have. It's my favorite film of 2005 and I've recommended it to several people since then. I really like Alexandre Desplat's score (which I felt like was often echoed by the series Homeland), and Tim Blake Nelson's "corruption is why we win" monologue creeps up in my brain with regularity.

I was hoping Gold would have been a strong follow-up from Stephen Gaghan, and while it was enjoyable enough, it was nowhere near that level.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Double features of Syriana and The Constant Gardener are gonna become all the rage soon, just you watch


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 6:07 pm
mfunk9786 wrote:
Double features of Syriana and The Constant Gardener are gonna become all the rage soon, just you watch

HAHAHAHA, I loved The Constant Gardener also!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
Suburbicon should be taught in schools as a guide for how not to make a Coen brothers movie. The main section of second-rate Coensy dark comedy (it's easy to see why this was collecting dust on the Coens' shelf for 30 years) is executed with such puzzling straightness and stodginess that any potentially funny joke or moment is immediately killed (Oscar Isaac manages to briefly make the movie fun, but he's out as soon as he came in). And the completely shoehorned-in subplot about the black family moving in next door to Matt Damon and Julianne Moore and getting mobbed by the townsfolk is more Stanley Kramer than Coens. It resembles a parody of white liberal clueless filmmaking, with the family's only characteristics being their stoic reactions to racism (the father literally gets no lines, and only one or two shots where you can clearly see his face) and their story ending on a completely ludicrous, false note of uplift. The two parts are completely incompatible, but either one would make a terrible movie on its own, so I guess it's good Clooney decided to only make us pay for one terrible movie.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Films of 2017
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:22 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Such a shame. I had a good laugh at Damon on the tricycle in the trailer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Films of 2017
PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 6:41 am 

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am
Well Clooney has been whiffing it for a while, both in front and behind the camera (Caesar and Tomorrowland were fine, his Ides of March was his last good directing credit)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Films of 2017
PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 4:16 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm
If Damon does any publicity for the film everyone will ask him what he knew about Harvey anyway, so he might be better off if this sinks without trace.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:30 pm 

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:01 am
This was dogshit. Sorry to all involved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
George Clooney seems insistent that he can be a good director of screwball comedy, but he's never actually been able to pull it off. Perhaps he should just stick to drama and leave comedy to... you know, people who are funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
I thought his Kaufman film was pretty funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
But was it funny because the director was funny or the screenwriter?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:51 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
knives wrote:
I thought his Kaufman film was pretty funny.

Against all odds - Kaufman has said he was very frustrated by changes that Clooney insisted on making to the script:

Charlie Kaufman wrote:
I didn’t like it. That was a movie on which I was not consulted. I mean, George Clooney changed the script, he didn’t talk to me during production. We kind of didn’t get along. I was invited to see the movie when he was pretty much done and I wrote a bunch of notes and gave them to him and I guess it was offensive to him.

Gregory wrote:
But was it funny because the director was funny or the screenwriter?

This film was written by the Coens, so that sort of torpedoes that argument

I've definitely heard over the years that Clooney is someone who believes he is hilarious, I remember some guest on a radio show (probably Stern) talking about this, and theorizing that after a cavalcade of beautiful women have forced themselves to laugh at his bon mots, he has convinced himself that he must be the wittiest man on the planet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
mfunk9786 wrote:
Gregory wrote:
But was it funny because the director was funny or the screenwriter?

This film was written by the Coens, so that sort of torpedoes that argument

I've definitely heard over the years that Clooney is someone who believes he is hilarious, I remember some guest on a radio show (probably Stern) talking about this, and theorizing that after a cavalcade of beautiful women have forced themselves to laugh at his bon mots, he has convinced himself that he must be the wittiest man on the planet.
I was responding to the comment just above mine about the Kaufman film, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind.

To me it often seems like men who have already "won" everything else in show business feel a burning desire to be hailed as great talents in comedy as well. Sometimes they can win at that too, but other times being witty or charming is far from being actually funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Just for clarity, the original script for SUBURBICON was by the Coens, but Clooney/Heslov did a credited rewrite. And my understanding is that guild rules are such that, if their rewrite was credited, it means their changes were very substantial.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
I knew that Clooney had reworked Suburbicon and was a credited cowriter on it but hadn't realized he'd also substantially changed Confessions of a Dangerous Mind without consulting Kaufman. So yep, argument torpedoed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Brian C wrote:
Just for clarity, the original script for SUBURBICON was by the Coens, but Clooney/Heslov did a credited rewrite. And my understanding is that guild rules are such that, if their rewrite was credited, it means their changes were very substantial.

My understanding is the main change is the subplot about a black family which he felt compelled to put in for whatever reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Films of 2017
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
Such a shame. I had a good laugh at Damon on the tricycle in the trailer.

I saw this tonight and - aside from being as awful as everyone in this thread has said - what's truly amazing is how little this moment registers in the actual movie. The people cutting the trailer made a semi-decent sight gag out of it, but Clooney himself couldn't even manage that much.

I don't know if I've seen a worse movie in years, to be honest. I think I hated everything about it, including Isaac's character, who would be a weak link in any actual Coen brothers movie this side of The Ladykillers. And it's not just bad in the usual ways (although it is bad in the usual ways also), it's bad in all the worst ways; it's a fatuous, witless, patronizing and downright ugly movie, both in its stupid bullshit kitschy mock '50s photography and, well, the very rot of its soul.

In short, it's the kind of movie that makes me think the filmmakers might be terrible people, and I suspect it'll seriously make me look at Clooney substantially more negatively from here on out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:00 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm
Quote:
stupid bullshit kitschy mock '50s photography


I haven't this yet, but Robert Elswit is one of the great living cinematographers, and 1950s Levittown is a very visual setting for a film. It's possible I will agree with you that this is a bad film, but do you really think it was poorly photographed and/or visualized? From the trailer the stylized elements appear fully achieved to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 11:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Dylan wrote:
I haven't this yet, but Robert Elswit is one of the great living cinematographers, and 1950s Levittown is a very visual setting for a film. It's possible I will agree with you that this is a bad film, but do you really think it was poorly photographed and/or visualized? From the trailer the stylized elements appear fully achieved to me.

Elswit has done some great work, sure, but to me this looked like a movie that was aping the usual cliched 1950s look more than coming up with a look of its own.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:03 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
The only visuals that really stood out to me were some of the more shadowy shots (I think there's one in the trailer of one of the intruders with his face blacked out that's quite nice), otherwise it's too reliant on the cliche vision of bright, peppy 50s suburbs. It seems to have serious issues as well, but what I've seen of Roman J. Israel, Esq. suggests that it at least has much more interesting work from Elswit.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection