Author Topic: The Wrestler  (Read 13709 times)

Clovis8

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11721
The Wrestler
« on: December 31, 2008, 02:33:41 PM »
Wow. Its now cliche to say that Rouke gives the performance of a lifetime. It is nonetheless completely true. In my opinion he is a lock for the best actor Oscar. There was not another performance even close this year, including Ledger in TDK. I for one could not care less about wrestling, but I gained a new respect for it after watching this movie. I liked the movie alot, but I think without Rouke's performance it would not be nearly as great. I don't think it will make my top 5, but it is worth a viewing for sure. It has a great ending.

P.S. anyone on the forum know about wrestling? Is the violence in the movie real? I always thought wrestling was way more fake. Fake blood, fake hits etc, but in the movie it is all so real.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17562
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2008, 03:06:02 PM »
The blood is real, it's a long tradition that they cut themselves with razor blades, although sometimes they bleed the natural way without any help from a razor. They do learn how to fall, but even the most rudimentary of bumps, when they fall, can mess you up. Hits from steel chairs, tables, glass, etc.. is all real, although they will use cheaper chairs to lessen the impact and pre-cut the tables to lessen the impact there. Not all the time mind you, some guys prefer to do everything for real, others don't care if some things are gimmicked up.

Sheepboy

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 2009, 11:57:25 PM »
I got around to seeing this a few nights ago and really enjoyed it, although it had it's flaws. I really liked the understated direction and simple approach Aronofsky took here and thought it largely worked.

Rourke is getting a lot of acclaim for his performance and rightly so. Even though some may say Randy the Ram isn't too far off some of the circumstances and situations that's dogged his career he still elevates it from being a pure pity party. I was also surprised how violent and graphic some of the images were, it certainly had me cringing at times.

The biggest problem I had with the film was both the female roles with Tomei and Wood either feel undercooked or in the case with the latter simply fall flat on it's face. While Rourke gets the bulk of screen time as we follow the character through the minutiae of his activities the same attention isn't given to the rest of the cast and in the end I had problems believing the motivations and actions Tomei's character made near the end, trying to reconcile and get together with Randy. That felt somewhat hollow.

Still despite a very simplistic story, a forgettable performance by Evan Rachel Wood (Who for the record was brilliant in Down in the Valley) I appreciated how the film didn't pull any punches and walked away pretty satisfied.

NedMeier

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 995
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2009, 05:54:15 PM »
I caught The Wrestler this afternoon. It just opened in Michigan today. I loved it. I agree with just about everyone in the world Mickey Rourke's performance was amazing. I also loved the little wrestling touches. I was a huge WWF fan in the 80's. The Nintendo game was hilarious.

P.S.
Did anyone catch during beginning magazine and poster montage, one of the tag-teams that was wrestling on the undercard was Mr. Pink and Mr. White?

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2009, 07:35:45 PM »
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

gateway

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1621
  • Boom De Ah Da.
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2009, 07:39:41 PM »
Just saw this today, and aside from Rourke's performance I have to say it seemed like a pretty  by-the-numbers redemption story. But that's a big "aside from." Rourke is really great here, I wouldn't say it's the best performance of the year (I still put Frank Langella in that spot), but he is definitely in my top 5. He elevates this film by at least one star, maybe even two. But I have to agree with Adam and Matty, the screenplay here is pretty basic territory that has been visited numerous times before and Siegel doesn't really add anything new to this story. And the supporting cast, specifically Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood in the only two major supporting roles, are basically the same way: they do their job, but there's nothing special about them whatsoever (I will say though that I did like Ernest Miller in a brief appearance at the end as the Ayatollah). But in the end, that doesn't make The Wrestler a bad movie. Rouke's performance makes the movie good, but if he'd had a little help, this could have been one of the best films of the year.
"I hope someday to be rich enough to smoke giant cigars while cackling maniacally."
- Nathan Rabin (echoing my thoughts exactly)

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27490
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2009, 09:02:29 PM »
Just saw this today, and aside from Rourke's performance I have to say it seemed like a pretty  by-the-numbers redemption story. But that's a big "aside from." Rourke is really great here, I wouldn't say it's the best performance of the year (I still put Frank Langella in that spot), but he is definitely in my top 5. He elevates this film by at least one star, maybe even two. But I have to agree with Adam and Matty, the screenplay here is pretty basic territory that has been visited numerous times before and Siegel doesn't really add anything new to this story. And the supporting cast, specifically Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood in the only two major supporting roles, are basically the same way: they do their job, but there's nothing special about them whatsoever (I will say though that I did like Ernest Miller in a brief appearance at the end as the Ayatollah). But in the end, that doesn't make The Wrestler a bad movie. Rouke's performance makes the movie good, but if he'd had a little help, this could have been one of the best films of the year.

I think it was one of the best films of the year, but I also think you are spot on in just about everything you wrote, aside from Langella being better than Rourke. I think that Aronofsky also put in enough to give the movie a feel of its own, which helped me give it the extra points on top of Rourke's work in the main role. It was mostly by the numbers, Wood and Tomei were not spectacular, but I thought it was all executed perfectly. I see The Wrestler a lot like I see Milk, nothing transcendent in the genre, but a perfection of the genre standard. And while it is likely an unpopular opinion, I watched The Wrestler and immediately felt that this film is what Rocky should be.

kizik

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • R.I.P. Laura Palmer
    • kizik's blog
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2009, 11:59:36 PM »
I was disappointed by the lack of back-story in this film. All you English Lit majors (I am also one) out there might tell me that more back-story = more boring. But I didn't have enough info to be fully invested in the story. Where is Stephanie's mom? Why did The Ram "fall from grace"? Was he simply too beaten up to continue wrestling during the 90s, or was there some kind of downfall?

The film lacked sufficient action for me. While its stylistic sparsity was refreshing, it fell short of being compelling.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2009, 12:01:53 AM by kizik »

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2009, 12:05:56 AM »
I was disappointed by the lack of back-story in this film. All you English Lit majors (I am also one) out there might tell me that more back-story = more boring. But I didn't have enough info to be fully invested in the story. Where is Stephanie's mom? Why did The Ram "fall from grace"? Was he simply too beaten up to continue wrestling during the 90s, or was there some kind of downfall?

The film lacked sufficient action for me. While its stylistic sparsity was refreshing, it fell short of being compelling.

Wrong.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

edgar00

  • 00 Agent
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *
  • Posts: 12131
  • corndogs are better than Die Another Day
    • Between The Seats
Re: The Wrestler
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2009, 01:06:11 AM »
I was disappointed by the lack of back-story in this film. All you English Lit majors (I am also one) out there might tell me that more back-story = more boring. But I didn't have enough info to be fully invested in the story. Where is Stephanie's mom? Why did The Ram "fall from grace"? Was he simply too beaten up to continue wrestling during the 90s, or was there some kind of downfall?

The film lacked sufficient action for me. While its stylistic sparsity was refreshing, it fell short of being compelling.

Wrong.

Agreeing with frosty.

How embarrassing.
-Le Chiffre: You changed your shirt, Mr Bond. I hope our little game isn't causing you to perspire.

-James Bond: A little. But I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood.

https://twitter.com/Betweentheseats
http://crabkeyheadquarters.wordpress.com/