MovieChat Forums > bravo_bravo
bravo_bravo (187)
MovieChat Contributor
Posts
Replies
p.s. This thread got me reading up a bit on Reeve's work on Superman on Wikipedia; apparently he had "based his portrayal of Clark Kent on Cary Grant in his role in 'Bringing Up Baby'." Grant happens to be one of my favorite actors and "Bringing Up Baby" one of my favorite movies. Always nice seeing a convergence of favorites.
I also read about casting director Lynn Stalmaster's efforts to get Reeve the opportunity:
[quote]Lynn Stalmaster, the casting director, put Reeve's picture and résumé on the top of the pile three separate times, only to have the producers throw it out each time. Through Stalmaster's persistent pleading, a meeting between director Richard Donner, producer Ilya Salkind, and Reeve was set in January 1977 at the Sherry Netherland Hotel on Fifth Avenue.[/quote]
So, thank you to Mr. Stalmaster.
For me, this question begins and ends with only one answer... Yes,
Christopher Reeve in Superman (1978)
The epitome of superhero for me. His Superman was a proper hero, and his Clark Kent a gentleman. It was a great call to depict masculinity with not only strength and courage, but also gentleness and vulnerability. He was superhuman *and* human, he had nerve *and* heart. And rarely if ever has devotion to your loved one been this heroic ([spoiler]What does he do when the woman he loves dies, but [i]go back in time[/i] in answer? He literally moved heaven and earth to save someone. Hard to top that.[/spoiler]). But most gutsy and genius of all is his innocence. I never saw any of the Superman sequels, but at least in the original Superman, he managed to hold on to the part of him that's pure. I admire that.
He was also the first superhero (and probably the first hero) I ever saw in movies. And from what I've read about his life, he was a great human being, too.
"Weather forecast for tonight: dark. Continued dark overnight, with widely scattered light by morning."
* * * * *
"The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."
* * * * *
“People can't seem to get it through their heads that there is never any healing or closure. Ever. There is only a short pause before the next "horrifying" event. People forget there is such a thing as memory, and that when a wound "heals" it leaves a permanent scar that never goes away, but merely fades a little. What really ought to be said after one of these so-called tragedies is, "Let the scarring begin.”
* * * * *
"The most unfair thing about life is the way it ends. I mean, life is tough. It takes up a lot of your time. What do you get at the end of it? A Death! What’s that, a bonus? I think the life cycle is all backwards. You should die first, get it out of the way. Then you live in an old age home. You get kicked out when you’re too young, you get a gold watch, you go to work. You work forty years until you’re young enough to enjoy your retirement. You do drugs, alcohol, you party, you get ready for high school. You go to grade school, you become a kid, you play, you have no responsibilities, you become a little baby, you go back into the womb, you spend your last nine months floating …and you finish off as an orgasm.”
Glad you got your answer so quickly!
[quote]Also, I really wish there was a board to discuss movies people have forgotten the name of, because I have plenty![/quote]
You might also want to try the "I Need to Know" sub-board. That's where these types of questions often were on the old IMDb boards, anyway.
On MC, it's the first link under the "Trivia! Trivia!" section, or direct link here:
[url]https://moviechat.org/bd0000001/I-Need-To-Know[/url]
Thank you for the recommendations, brux.
Barbara Ehrenreich does great work; I haven't read any of her books but I've come across a few of her articles and it's always worthwhile.
I started Jared Diamond's "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed" a while back and am still getting through it; it's pretty sobering but great.
Yeah, "The Untold History of the United States" is good, and it's the best thing Oliver Stone has done lately. I was hoping he'd bring the same lucidity and even-handedness to his take on "Snowden," but alas... maybe next time.
Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" has been on my list, but I'd forgotten about it—thanks for reminding me of it!
And yes, "A Fine Mess" is one for right now. Yesterday, even!
I haven't read or heard anything about how they managed to get the film made, but in Australia there were two organizations that lobbied to have it reclassified, which would've effectively banned it in Australia. They weren't successful, though, according to Wikipedia; the Classification Review Board voted in favor of maintaining the original rating.
Yeah, it's rare for a film like this to be made and distributed, and I'm glad it's part of our cinema. If a film is going to tackle something as disturbing and real as child sexual abuse, it should be done seriously, with substance and a lot of care, and I think Araki succeeded there.
"Milk" is well done, just a little conventional or safe for my taste. There seems to be two sides to Van Sant, the more mainstream side that we get with films like "Milk," "Good Will Hunting," and "The Sea of Trees," and the more auteur, intimate, and experimental side with films like "Drugstore Cowboys," "My Own Private Idaho," "To Die For," and "Elephant" (that I've now also seen).
I'm partial to the latter, but "Milk" is definitely a good film. Sean Penn and Josh Brolin are also very good in it.
Ah, sorry, man, I took your "kidding" to be absolute. That one's going in the queue, too, now!
Ruth Negga is gorgeous. I haven't seen any of her movies yet, though.
Cool, another Michael Shannon grand moment! (I love his small, eccentric role in "Mud," btw.) There are some actors about whom I can just know that I enjoy them even if I haven't seen or won't see much of their work, and Shannon's one of them. Gary Oldman, Tilda Swinton, Javier Bardem, Sam Rockwell, and Philip Seymour Hoffman are some others. Awesome actors.
> > I guess I inadvertently settled on a theme of “grief and guilt following a family tragedy.”
Funny, last week I inadvertently went down the "coming-of-age young woman with mother issues [spoiler]leaves home[/spoiler]" road with "Lady Bird" and "Columbus."
> > Throughout the movies I kept thinking, “Why don’t these people get some professional help?”
I know, right? I feel like we really want to see these people get back up, and part of me just wants to reach through the screen and go, "Argh, come on, man, you can do it!"
But maybe these characters (well, at least the one in "Manchester" as I haven't seen "The Deep End of the Ocean,") are very private, inward individuals who tend to keep things to themselves, and maybe they'd be even less inclined to talk about their issues with strangers than with the people they know. Also, just speaking from my own experience knowing people who've gone through rough times, maybe they don't believe that professional help will actually help (at least if we're talking therapy, not medications), because therapists seem to only offer help with process, when what people need is someone who can personally and specifically understand what they're going through, someone who understands more of the context, because they share some of the same experience. Only friends and family who know them and the people they'd lost can do that. That's why I think it's very fortunate for Lee in "Manchester" that he has George (played by C.J. Wilson).
I love this movie, though it is draining to watch in places.
View all replies >