Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner I believe is the first Katharine Hepburn movie I saw. Of course, at the time I didn’t know who Katharine Hepburn was and I was looking at it more for general boredom and because it had Sidney Poitier. How times have changed. One thing that struck me about the film was how tastefully everything was done. Sure, Kramer’s screenplay is a bit unrealistic and even a bit on the schmaltzy side, but the film never veered into the annoying or the superfluous, it was always very, very sophisticated. And I suppose this is why I’m a fan of it.

                 

Today, the film’s nomination for Best Picture [and it’s Best Actress win] are somewhat maligned. Although I’ve never found Christina Drayton to be Kate’s more accomplished roles, I wouldn’t deny the fact that the performance was good. As much as I love The Graduate I never thought Anne Bancroft deserved that much attention for her supporting role. All things equal, I suppose Kate’s Christina was supporting too; and I wonder if the performance would be as maligned if she’d won Best Supporting Actress that year over Estelle Parsons. Still, the only nominee that I would have readily handed the Oscar over to was the other Hepburn. But I digress. Kate is phoning it in a bit in the performance, but I still find her performance to be oddly delightful.

There are some key moments to Kate’s performance in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner. There is, of course, that now legendary confrontation she has with her subordinate. It’s one of the funnier parts of the performance [and film] and Kate handles the bigoted [] quite well. I like the way she plays it, because it seems that after seeing how nasty [] looks she’ll have nothing to do with dissuading Dr. Prentice from marrying Joey. That almost frivolous ice-cream drive is not as silly as it seems. Kate’s quasi monologue to her husband seems to be the basis of her happiness for Joey. She realises that [black-or-white] Joey has found someone she can be of use to, and be happy with – and this pleases her. Much has been said of her teary eyes in the film [and all those wretched close-ups from Kramer], and there’s no crying scene more important than when she parts ways with her husband. It’s a nice little moment for the two thespians – this is Tracy’s film – but Kate has a nice little important part in the bedroom and that long voiceless walk down the stairs as she stares out at the sky is beautiful in its own clichéd way.

                     

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner is #92 on my list of favourites, so perhaps I am a bit easy on it [obviously]. Regardless of whether or not Kate’s win makes you happy or annoyed, there is something good to be taken from the film. And even if it’s not your favourite Kate win, it’s a good place to start when looking at the shades of Katharine Hepburn

         
Addendum. I read this before seeing Joe's review. I guess you can see it and not find anything redeeming :)

The Katharine Hepburn Awards: Featured Actors

If I had my way there would be three actors that stand out as doing exceptional jobs when featured next to Kate. John Castle as the duplicitous Geoffrey, Dean Stockwell as the sickly Edmund and possibly Cecil Kellaway’s nonconformist and affable priest. Of the categories up for contention this was the most surprising in terms of nominees.

                       
The Nominees

Montgomery Clift in Suddenly Last Summer
Anthony Hopkins in The Lion in Winter
Sidney Poitier in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?
Jason Robards in Long Day’s Journey Into Night
Dean Stockwell in Long Day’s Journey Into Night
    

I’m a fan of Clift, but I was surprised at his inclusion in the lot at the expense of more popular [and deserving?] performances. Clift plays a doctor hired to analyse the victimised Elizabeth Taylor as her aunt Mrs. Venable [Kate] demands that she be lobotomised. His role is mostly nondescript and it’s also after that tragic accident he had so his good looks are exceptionally marred [I couldn’t find a photo]. I know in her book she recounts how she spat in Joseph L. Mankievich’s face because of their treatment of Monty. It’s either funny or rude, depending on who you are.

               

Anthony Hopkins was no surprise. His Richard is generally regarded as the best of the supporting players in The Lion in Winter, and his debut performance is certainly nothing to be reticent about. Of the three sons Hopkins has the most supporting time with Kate and his two major scenes with her and both well played. A favourite line of hers, Love me little lamb or leave me. are delivered wonderfully and Hopkins’ doesn’t shirk at the chance to show his chops.

           

Of the five men, Poitier has the least one on one time with Kate. I was actually unsure as where to put him. Spencer is obviously the leading man of the film, but I wasn’t quite sure that Poitier was supporting. Oh well. It’s a simple role for him – he just has to be charming. He’s effective though and his big moments in that confrontation scene with his father are well played. The man had style. That much is indisputable.

              

Jason Robards plays Jamie in Long Day’s Journey into Night – Kate’s alcoholic son. Other than a fifth and most superfluous character, this film is a quartet of actors trying their best. I’m not overly fond of Eugene O’Neill or this film, but when it’s good the dialogue is exceptional and Jason Robards is good here. He has less time with Kate than Richardson and Stockwell, but his internal character is well played. It’s also a more deserving performance than either of his eventual Oscar wins.

         

Dean Stockwell is my pick of the lot [I didn’t vote] but don’t let that sway you. It’s a pity that neither Stockwell nor Robards earned even a nomination for there performances here. Edmund is Kate’s younger son who may or may not be dying from consumption. As is typical with the younger child he’s the coddled of the two boys and his scenes with Kate are exceptional [albeit depressing].

              

KEEP VOTING. Polls close on Wednesday. The results will be in on Thursday.

Precious: Much Too Much

There’s quite much that has been said about Precious since its premiere on the festival circuit and its eventual cinematic premiere. To an extent, it always sucks getting a movie so late in the game; and you have to wonder if your feelings were influenced by spoilers or other reviews. Who knows? I can’t give myself a psychological analysis and determine what did or did not influence me. What I can do is give my feelings on said film. So here goes.

Precious tells the story of Clarice Precious Jones. She is an obese seventeen year old living with her abusive mother. Precious’ father [her mother’s boyfriend] is also the father of her toddler daughter and currently unborn child. That’s the crisis. Precious becomes a candidate for an alternative education programme and has intermittent meetings with a welfare officer. Her mother’s abuse becomes heightened with the birth of her second child – that’s the conflict.

             

I found Precious to be an imperfect film. Although they may, fans of Precious need not take offence, I’m just offering my take. My biggest issue with the film is Geoffrey Fletcher’s screenplay and Lee Daniels’ direction. I suppose those are big things so taking issue with them is essentially taking issue with the entire film. I suppose I am. I’m not certain if perhaps it’s the screenplay that’s the bigger problem of the two. Although I’m not the first to say it, I must assert that the lack of subtlety in this story really annoyed me. Those dream sequences are a big part of that. The very fact that they’re written and; their eventual realisation on the screen represent my least favourite parts of the film. First of all, it’s as if Fletcher and Daniels think that the audience is ignorant. Does Precious want to be a star? By all means let’s show that. Does she want to sing in the choir? Ditto for that. And on and on and on. That’s called overkill. What’s more these dream sequences come at some moments you’d wish that wouldn’t segue into the imaginary. Precious gets thrown down on the sidewalk [not as graphic as it sounds] or her mother pelts her with a blunt object. She falls. And we segue into a dream. Why not show the humiliation? Why avert the story from the horror that’s supposed to ensue and then move into a dream sequence that shows us what we’ve already established?

                

But, don’t feel that I’m talking down to Precious. I wouldn’t dare. It takes as much effort to make a bad film as it does to make a good film; and for the record Precious is not a bad film. I haven’t seen Weiez, Mulligan, Cornish, Mirren and a few other important Actress contenders, but Sidibe looks impressive from where I’m standing. Not my favourite thus far, but it’s good nonetheless. I’ll admit, she gets annoying sometimes when her speech is so garbled it become unintelligible. I understand that Precious is uneducated, but there’s a thin line between showing your character and being abstruse.

             

Now on to the supporting women. Mo’Nique as Precious’ mother is good. Quite good. But I can’t find myself calling it great as others have. I feel that I expected just a little more – not in terms of performance perhaps, but maybe screen time. I did not find any fault in her performances but it never reached that level of excellence, and at the end of the day that’s not half bad. I blame the screenplay. Mariah Carey as a welfare officer is better than the detractors of her cause, but perhaps not as sensational as her fans. If she’s nominated I won’t be shocked, but if she’s not I won’t be either. I like Mariah, but if they so badly wanted to nominate a pop star. They’ve had chances before. Deserving or not, they’ve had chances. Paula Patton however has turned into something of an unsung hero[ine]. It’s a bit sad that nothing has been said of her performance, but I found her to be the real find of the film. Perhaps not as eclectic as Mo’Nique but certainly wrought with potential.

                 

In the end I never felt emotionally involved in Precious. It never was graphic enough for me, and that pisses me off. I sound a bit gratuitous which is ironic in line of recent reviews, but there was just this incongruity that threw me. Then there’s the fact that this is closer to a Dangerous Minds themed story since more of the film occurs in the 'heavenly' room of Ms. Rains – complete with a golden hue to mark Precious’ first entrance. Subtle? Not so much. The film has the potential to shock, maybe not offensively so – but it could have been this harsh, nitty-gritty, reality check for the audience. But other than one horrible scene, that’s not as horrible as it seems, Precious skirts around those deeper issues settling for the easier issues that make the audience comfortable. And that final confession at the end, which should move me does anything but. Precious was fine; but in the end not precious enough to tempt me.

                   

B

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 Sneak Peek

The Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince DVD included a 56-second sneak peek of the first part of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The film will be released 19 November next year.

The Movie Review: It’s Hard Out There For a Blogger

I don’t believe we realise the importance of our words. I think it was in Iris that Kate Winslet said “Without words, how can one think?” How indeed. I’ve always found it relatively simple to give me thoughts on a particular issue or film. Nonetheless, even the best [or worse] of us are sometimes wary of offering views that are a bit too avant garde or go against the status quo. Sure, the liberal person may scoff at this wariness; but we all know that sometimes in the world [blogging and otherwise] sometimes it’s difficult to be a nonconformist.

           

It doesn’t matter who’s reading you. It could be five, fifty or a hundred; but you have to be certain that the words you’re using are a true and accurate reflection of how you feel. It does not matter whether or not you’re an authority or not. This is especially accurate when we consider our reviews. We’ve probably all been there before. We see a film that’s been critically acclaimed and experienced nothing but disappointment or even disgust. It may be unethical, but we wonder if we’re wrong. Should we check again? Should we just follow the majority? They must know what they’re talking about. It’s tougher for some than others, and it usually gets easier as we get older but sometimes it’s difficult to have your opinion and keep it.

               

The other thing about reviewing film is measurement. A thumbs up, thumbs down approach might be too vague, but a meticulous numerical form could be too stratified. And what do you do when you like a movie but don’t think it was that excellently constructed. Or vice versa: you’re faced with a well made but emotionless and clinical piece. Which gets the higher grade? Which is the “better” film? It’s happened to me. I still wonder if I should have given Harry Potter a B or Into Temptation a C+. Sure I’ve never thought of dropping a film from A to B- after a few months, but I’m sure others have. What do you do then? After a week I still cannot decide on a grade for Antichrist.

             

The end result is that you wonder if you’re “qualified” for this. After all what the f*** do you know about critiquing? I wonder, am I crazy for ranking Cheri with a B+ and Inglourious Basterds with a B-? But then it occurs to me. The issue is not liking a film that no one appreciates, and it’s not hating a film that everyone loves. It all comes down to honesty and integrity. Love Twilight if you must. Hate Revolutionary Road if you must. But if you can’t give me a reason as to why X is better than Y, then something is wrong. If you can’t defend your opinion, you’re probably not worthy of having them.

Soderbergh Blog-a-Thon Day Two: Ocean’s Twelve

 There's a blogathon going on over at LAMB. Luckily I had these few words on my computer, so I was able to participate.

              

Steven Soderbergh is a man I like. It’s strange, as a director I can probably only pick out a handful of his films that I believe to be particularly good. However, all things being equal I think the man is talented, and for the most part is films if not great are always original. When Soderbergh released Ocean’s Eleven in 2001 it was a financial success, and although it was not as critically successful as it should have been, it was still significantly well received. The 2004 sequel didn’t fare as well. The critics were lukewarm, and even though it made money – it wasn’t as much as was anticipated. The movie is faulty. That much is obvious, but for all its incongruity, its indulgency and its downright silliness Ocean’s Twelve is still a nice good romp. And if I’m going to watch a director wallow in his indulgency, Soderbergh is not a bad one to pick.

As with its predecessor Ocean’s Twelve centres on a heist, gone wrong [and perhaps delightfully right] and with heightened use of running gags and some ridiculous [and might I add effective] allusions, Soderbergh manages to get his story across. Critics of the film have claimed that the movie seems to be a giant reason for some A-list celebrities to get together and have a good time. I agree, and the people who criticise that are completely missing the point. 2004 was a generally good year in film, but no other film [not even the delightfully idiosyncratic Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind; or the spotty, but well meant Sideways] boasts a cast of actors enjoying themselves as much as they do in Ocean’s Twelve. It’s pointless to ridicule Tess [Julia Roberts] meeting with Bruce Willis as pandering. Sure, if you haven’t seen The Sixth Sense, or don’t know of the two’s history you may be a little lost, but if you don’t you’re probably not the film’s target audience.

                  

Only a director completely assured of his talents would have that Julia Roberts/Tess scene and in the realm of the Ocean's world it works. Boy does it work. Sure, we wonder how exactly is it that Yen is able to understand the others in the group and vice versa, but we don't care. And Matt Damon who is usually woefully underrated as a comedian is even better in this than in the original. That scene where he gets extradited is a favourite of mine. It's completely inconsequential, but that tongue-in-cheek way is Soderbergh's relaity in Ocean's Twelve.

              

In a way Ocean’s Twelve reminds me of old cinema. Not in it’s story, or its direction per se. But it gets a group of actors together and makes a film centring on their natural personalities. Julia Roberts is always comfortable playing the zany girl, Zeta-Jones is always effective playing moody and angry, Clooney’s biggest successes are always as the well intentioned bad boy and the list goes on. To say that Ocean’s Twelve doesn’t take itself seriously is an understatement of the ages. There’s nothing in the movie to be taken seriously. Perhaps you didn’t go see it because you have better things to do that give money to a host of already rich celebrities, but I like to think that Ocean’s Twelve is better than that. I’d even like to think that even if they thought no one would show up, these actors would still make the movie. Ocean’s Twelve isn’t The Hours, or In the Bedroom or even Soderbergh’s Traffic; but it is an actors’ flick in the more irreverent use of the phrase. It’s indulgent and silly, but it’s also a whole lot of fun. And any film that gives Cherry Jones a few lines gets my approval.

Cinema Blogging

I've been MIA for the past two days, sorry about that. Life calls. Anyhow, a fellow blog buddy of mine is having a blogathon that seems cool. I probably won't get the chance to make an entry, but I'd appreciate [and he would too] if you'd participate. The information is below, and you can click on the link to get to his blog and get contact information.

I'd like for you to blog about a memory you have of going to the cinema. You may have been 5, you may have been 32, it may have included your first kiss, or a friend getting arrested, or you may have accidently set fire to the screen. Whatever it is - I want December 3rd to be the day we blog with this title, a personal memory of a cinema experience gone right/or wrong/or funny/or tragic. 

If you are interested - please get back to me! 

I will also be blogging on this topic on December 3rd. And then later on the same day, or maybe on the 4th (giving everyone a chance) - I will post a blog linking to ALL of your stories. 

I think it'll be a wonderful way for a) my friends and readers to discover your amazing blogs, and b) for all of yours to see everyone elses, c) for us to find many more great people with inspired blogs.

If you're in, let me know :) If you have a friend who would also love to do this, let me know too - 

I look forward to it!!