Author Topic: Top 100 Club: Sandy  (Read 6033 times)

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11393
  • You're not alone No matter what or who you've been
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #50 on: May 01, 2018, 03:26:37 PM »
It's a push for me whether to remember Tom Hulce for Amadeus or for The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
 

He has an endearing voice, both in singing and his speech.

Dave the Necrobumper

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11234
  • My tinypic changed so no avatar for a little while
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #51 on: May 01, 2018, 03:35:21 PM »
Who's month is May?

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11393
  • You're not alone No matter what or who you've been
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #52 on: May 01, 2018, 03:45:14 PM »
Who's month is May?

I think it is ses, if she has time.

Does someone want to call ses? :)

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 31994
  • Marathon Man
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #53 on: May 01, 2018, 03:52:51 PM »
Round Four is:

Junior
jdc
oldkid
ses
MartinTeller
Sandy
PeacefulAnarchy
1SO
Bondo
Teproc
Chardy999
pixote
Knocked Out Loaded
Sam the Cinema Snob
DarkeningHumour
Dave the Necrobumper
Must See  |  Should See  |  Good  |  Mixed  |  Bad  | The Worst

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11393
  • You're not alone No matter what or who you've been
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #54 on: May 01, 2018, 03:59:29 PM »
Becoming Jane
I like that the title works both as the story of how a woman became Jane, as well as the story of Jane, who is very becoming, though I wish it was more about the former. Hathaway does a perfectly good job, but she doesn't really command it, and this film really needs someone to dominate the screen in the lead. The text is fine, but it needs something more going on underneath; Emotions and thoughts that go beyond "I want to be a writer, I want to marry for love not money, I put my family above myself" would make Jane an actual person and not just a walking dilemma of torn convictions and contradicting feelings. Those scenes McAvoy gets as his introduction, expository and perfunctory as they are, are more than Jane gets in terms of building a character that stands on its own, her scenes are all plot point to plot point with her development always in contrast or reaction to events. I suppose that could speak to the role of women in her time, always controlled by events and never being able to be truly independent, but that is already seen more interestingly in the way Jane acts and reacts like a caged bird, fiercely independent of thought and word but always constrained by her upbringing and the harsh realities of her society. A peek into her thoughts and beliefs would help us know who she is as an actual human being, otherwise it treads closely to reinforcing the constraints of the time rather than just highlighting them. Jane's sharp wit is the only piece of individuality we really see, even her writing is obscured by montage structures and something we must take on faith from everyone saying she's a good writer. This might seem a really critical review, but I did enjoy the film. It has a nice tonal balance between happy moments and bittersweet ones and doesn't overdo the drama. I like what it does and enjoyed the way it does it, but I feel there's an even better movie in there struggling to get out.

She is becoming. :)



Thanks for helping me see the title differently! Do you think another actress could have had more presence? I heard Hathaway had studied Austen in college and worked hard to get the accent right. Or, do you think she was hindered by the writing? You cover so many possibilities why her character doesn't stand out as well as you'd hoped for. I'm in complete agreement with your words, "I feel there's an even better movie in there struggling to get out." Truly! I love this movie for what it is, and also for what it wishes to be. I mentioned earlier that it was directed and written by men. Do you think women may be the missing ingredient in the creation of this?

So happy you took the time to see it. You capture everything I feel about it's limitations and many of the things which make it one of my favorites.

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11393
  • You're not alone No matter what or who you've been
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #55 on: May 01, 2018, 04:00:52 PM »
Yes, this is the lineup. ses was busy and Martin was busy being a new dad! So I stepped in. I'm not sure how May is going to work out yet.

Round Four is:

Junior
jdc
oldkid
ses
MartinTeller
Sandy
PeacefulAnarchy
1SO
Bondo
Teproc
Chardy999
pixote
Knocked Out Loaded
Sam the Cinema Snob
DarkeningHumour
Dave the Necrobumper

pixote

  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 33200
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #56 on: May 01, 2018, 05:00:02 PM »
I haven't participated in a while (though I keep meaning to; I almost watched 13 Going on 30 last night, for example), but it seems the shift to separate threads for each participant has coincided with a lack of accountability ... which maybe works out well for me, lol.

Anyway, I'll try to catch up soon. I'm not even sure I ever posted my Willa Wonka review for whatever month I finally watched it.

pixote
I think I'd love how awkward it'd be, or how awkward it should be.

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11393
  • You're not alone No matter what or who you've been
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #57 on: May 01, 2018, 07:55:33 PM »
Willy Wonka counts for me too!

I watched 13 Going on 30 with my 13 year old, for the first time, a few weeks ago. Lots of bonding. :D

PeacefulAnarchy

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2131
    • Criticker reviews
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #58 on: May 01, 2018, 08:05:21 PM »
Becoming Jane
I like that the title works both as the story of how a woman became Jane, as well as the story of Jane, who is very becoming, though I wish it was more about the former. Hathaway does a perfectly good job, but she doesn't really command it, and this film really needs someone to dominate the screen in the lead. The text is fine, but it needs something more going on underneath; Emotions and thoughts that go beyond "I want to be a writer, I want to marry for love not money, I put my family above myself" would make Jane an actual person and not just a walking dilemma of torn convictions and contradicting feelings. Those scenes McAvoy gets as his introduction, expository and perfunctory as they are, are more than Jane gets in terms of building a character that stands on its own, her scenes are all plot point to plot point with her development always in contrast or reaction to events. I suppose that could speak to the role of women in her time, always controlled by events and never being able to be truly independent, but that is already seen more interestingly in the way Jane acts and reacts like a caged bird, fiercely independent of thought and word but always constrained by her upbringing and the harsh realities of her society. A peek into her thoughts and beliefs would help us know who she is as an actual human being, otherwise it treads closely to reinforcing the constraints of the time rather than just highlighting them. Jane's sharp wit is the only piece of individuality we really see, even her writing is obscured by montage structures and something we must take on faith from everyone saying she's a good writer. This might seem a really critical review, but I did enjoy the film. It has a nice tonal balance between happy moments and bittersweet ones and doesn't overdo the drama. I like what it does and enjoyed the way it does it, but I feel there's an even better movie in there struggling to get out.

She is becoming. :)



Thanks for helping me see the title differently! Do you think another actress could have had more presence? I heard Hathaway had studied Austen in college and worked hard to get the accent right. Or, do you think she was hindered by the writing? You cover so many possibilities why her character doesn't stand out as well as you'd hoped for. I'm in complete agreement with your words, "I feel there's an even better movie in there struggling to get out." Truly! I love this movie for what it is, and also for what it wishes to be. I mentioned earlier that it was directed and written by men. Do you think women may be the missing ingredient in the creation of this?

So happy you took the time to see it. You capture everything I feel about it's limitations and many of the things which make it one of my favorites.
I can't think of anyone off hand who would do it better, though I feel I've seen performances that capture what I'm thinking of they're not coming to mind. I quite like Hathaway as an actress and she has good screen presence and I wonder if maybe current Hathaway, 10 years later, could deliver more punch and complexity to the role. I don't really have a mental image of Jane and her personality beyond this film, so that makes it hard to imagine someone else in the role. The writing is ok but yeah, that's part of it. I was thinking of your comment about it being written and directed by men, especially when thinking about McAvoy and the way he's presented vs the way Jane is. He doesn't quite overtake the film, but he takes a big part of the stage in a way that he probably shouldn't if the film is really to be about Jane. Relative to their importance in the film, the writers definitely gave him more to work with, though to his credit he made the most of it without outshining Hathaway. I hesitate to fall back on "a woman would have done it better," the film's (lead?) writer was a woman after all as was the editor, what's important is someone who has an interest in Jane as a person rather than a symbol which probably would be more likely from a woman than a man.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 18531
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Top 100 Club: Sandy
« Reply #59 on: May 02, 2018, 01:39:31 AM »
I'll send ses a message.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky