Author |
Message |
|
lshap |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:54 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4246
Location: Montreal
|
Pam - I never minded him as an actor. He's got that mumbly, understated thing that actually works in some of his characters. Not exactly Academy Award material, but not offensive either.
I also liked him in Field Of Dreams, but that's such a guy cliche, I know...
Chilly - Dances With Wolves was a really good film. Period. No equivocation. It's a solid, cohesive story with some fine acting and gorgeous cinematography. Unfortunately, that film's rep has suffered by association with Costner's later work.
Ignore the Costner-haters -- see it as an example of his talent before it was corrupted by overconfidence and ego. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
Jynx |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:58 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 750
Location: Nowheresville
|
chillybean - Connery's accent in The Untouchables was voted the worst accent in all of movie history. I think Garcia was muchos excellent in that film; Costner was zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ... flat lining in the first 10 minutes.
I liked Bull Durham but didn't count it b/c I only liked it on the merits of Sarandon and (yummy) Robbins. Once again, Costner put me to sleep, ESPECIALLY with his "Yeah, I was in the show. I was in the show for 21 days once -- the 21 greatest days of my life. You know, you never handle your luggage in the show, somebody else carries your bags. It was great. You hit white balls for batting practice, the ballparks are like cathedrals, the hotels all have room service, and the women all have long legs and brains." speech .... stupid rambling I've ever heard.
I did like the fight scene though and the "from what I hear, you couldn't hit water if you fell out of a fucking boat" will go down in quote history. |
_________________ "I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass ... and I'm all out of bubblegum." |
|
Back to top |
|
Jynx |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 3:02 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 750
Location: Nowheresville
|
Dances With Wolves was a really good film.
'specially when Costner knocks himself out. |
_________________ "I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass ... and I'm all out of bubblegum." |
|
Back to top |
|
Joe Vitus |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 3:05 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marilyn,
Completely agree about the music. I need to get the CD.[/b] |
|
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 4:00 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Jynx--Sorry, but you and I disagree 100 percent across the board about what was great, what was good, and what was soporific about "Bull Durham." Though he did not wreck the film for me, I was completely indifferent to Tim Robbins. His so-called charisma was nowhere evident to me. Sarandon gave a terrific performance but she has always lacked genuine sex appeal IMO. No complaints, and she was funny and charming, but sexy? Not so much. HOWEVER...I thought Costner had it all in that movie. He was appealing in every conceivable way, and his "Susan Sontag" speech was flat-out great acting in any league. I tend to be a big, big Costner fan anyway, but "Bull Durham" is his peak.
Other Costner home runs include the aforementioned "Field of Dreams," as well as "A Perfect World," "No Way Out," "Tin Cup," "Dances With Wolves" (didn't like the movie all that much, but he was wonderful), "Revenge," "300 Miles to Graceland," and "Open Range." Costner is not only a born star, he's a pretty wonderful actor on occasion, and most of all, he is ridiculously underrated and unappreciated. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 4:01 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
|
Back to top |
|
Mr. Brownstone |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 5:03 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 2450
|
Costner's at his best in works in which his creative hand seems to be most absent/influential, like:
A Perfect World
JFK
Bull Durham
No Way Out
Thirteen Days[/i]
Field of Dreams
I love Field of Dreams; I know I probably shouldn't simlpy because superficially it seems to be the male's answer to Beaches, but the feeling of that movie is so wonderful, so delicate, so earthy... I don't know... maybe it's because I'm from Iowa. Grew up 2 hours from the real Field of Dreams in Dyersville. Never been there.
As a semi-starving actor, there are a handful of movies that, on every level, I look at and wistfully daydream, wishing I had been in them.
Field of Dreams is one. The others are, of course, Dead Man Walking, Natural Born Killers, At Close Range, Reservoir Dogs, Jesus' Son, Fight Club, and, if I was older, Broadcast News and Smoke. |
_________________ "My name is Gunnery Sergeant Major Highway. And I have drunk more beer, pissed more blood, banged more quiff and knocked more skulls than all you numbnuts put together." - Clint Eastwood, Heartbreak Ridge |
|
Back to top |
|
marantzo |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 6:22 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
It amazes me that intelligent knowledgable film mavens would think that Field of Dreamswas anything more than the schlock fest that it was. A dreadful pandering movie and I felt so bad for Lancaster playing a role in one of the dumbest sequences that I've ever seen. Brownie got it right when he said a male Beaches. And he liked it, but he's got an excuse, he's from Iowa.
Tin Cup was also a stinker, but at least it didn't pretend to be anything but a light comedy anyway. Probably fun to watch at home on video.
Outside of The Untouchables (where he was good enough between great perfiormances by DeNiro and Bond) and possible Silverado I have never found him convincing in a performance. Bull Durham was good but his little speech to Sarandon about what he likes, made me want to hurl. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
Joe Vitus |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 7:17 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
I SO agree with Marantzo about Field of Dreams. A really terrible movie that doesn't earn the tears it produces. It isn't the movie that touches people, I think; it's what they've got stored up inside them from their past. If it were twice as bad, I think most of them would still cry. Shameless. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
ehle64 |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 7:41 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 7149
Location: NYC; US&A
|
I guess I don't agree with anyone, cause I have never liked Costner in anything!
He, along with Ben Affleck, is just too Generic McPlainwrap.
Blech! |
|
|
Back to top |
|
billyweeds |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 7:50 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Just watched "Annie Hall" on DVD for the first time in literally decades. I have the exact same feeling about it that I always did, which puts me in a minority of those who don't consider it Woody Allen's best or even second best movie. It's delightful, and still remarkably fresh considering that so much of it has become part of the language--both in its actual dialogue and its approach to romantic comedy.
But it doesn't IMO come up to "Manhattan" or "Crimes and Misdemeanors" or "Husbands and Wives" or a couple of others. It's just a little too slight for my taste. "Manhattan" is the one where Allen really puts it all together. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
marantzo |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 8:13 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
billy you and I are certainly on the same page as far as Woody's films go. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
Ghulam |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 8:35 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4742
Location: Upstate NY
|
I would also include Hannah And Her Sisters among his best. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
lshap |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 9:08 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4246
Location: Montreal
|
Crimes and Misdemeanors, Manhattan and Annie Hall - in that order of preference. Pretty close, Billy.
Have to see Hannah & Sisters again to judge it fairly.
Sleepers still makes me laugh like a complete idiot.
As to Field Of Dreams, Joe, isn't an ability to bring out something inside us -- a rough quote from you -- something every film aspires to do? If FOD was really bad that quality would've drowned underneath the weight of all that shit. That it touched so many people despite the obvious shlock is proof of some fundamental spark in its message.
I acknowledge its arch emotionality, as does Brownstone, but that alone wouldn't do it for me. Bald emotionality makes me wince; Field Of Dreams made me get teary-eyed. The whole thing -- the journey to find each ballplayer and pursuit of each ghostly message -- felt like a metaphor in the spirit of The Wizard Of Oz's journey along the yellow brick road. It accesses this primal need to connect, to reach out, to find something in others that, ultimately allows us to find something in ourselves.
Alright, I'm starting to mist up just thinking of the last scene with Costner and his Dad....gotta' go hug something... |
|
|
Back to top |
|
marantzo |
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 9:21 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
Hannah and Her Sisters is definitely in the upper level of Woody's products, but having to watch Barbara Hershey and her single dimpled expression, took away a lot of the enjoyment for me. Broadway Danny Rose is a movie that I could, and have, watched many times and I've enjoyed it as much or more every time. And I don't want to forget Sweet and Lowdown which I found to be cluttered with great performances and deeply moving. It was so unfairly treated. It was as if the people were just waiting, with their minds made up, to lable it a minor Allan, and he doesn't make them like he used to. I predict that down the road it will be included in the boxed set of Woody Allan's greatest movies. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|