poor blu rays

[strapped for cash]

The picture quality could/should be better (decent LPCM soundtrack, tho). I don't object to it looking grainy - it's a film largely shot in low light, after all - but the contrast and colour were disappointing.

Hmm, it was a while ago but I've got vague recollections it had a somewhat washed out look in the cinema as well. I might be wrong though, far too many years have passed to be certain about it!

This is precisely my problem with reviews of Blu-ray software on some websites.

I recall reading a review of The Back to the Future trilogy box set, which claimed images looked soft and grainy in theatres and that the Blu-ray versions accurately replicated the cinematic presentation of the films. It's good to know the reviewer was taking notes 25 years prior, in anticipation of the inevitable Blu-ray releases.

 

[strapped for cash]

Two minutes 10 seconds of Keanu in action in Dracula

Is this worse than Sean Connery's performance as a Russian submarine commander, or Kirk Douglas' turn as a French commanding officer?

Let's not forget **** Van **** in Mary Poppins, not to mention Don Cheadle's take on the cockney accent, which was so bad it was parodied in the subsequent Ocean's film.

Film history is littered with embarrasing stabs at accents or, in the first two cases cited, no effort whatsoever to disguise the inability of the star. I don't know why Keanu's being singled out for criticism, which isn't to say I'm a fan.

Now if you were criticising Natalie Portman -- Oscar winning emotional void that she is -- I'd happily join in. Nothing to do with accents, but the complete inability of Ms. Portman to emote, in ANY role she's played, really makes me angry, Prof...

 

[professorhat]

Two minutes 10 seconds of Keanu in action in Dracula

Is this worse than Sean Connery's performance as a Russian submarine commander, or Kirk Douglas' turn as a French commanding officer?

Yes.

Let's not forget **** Van **** in Mary Poppins, not to mention Don Cheadle's take on the cockney accent, which was so bad it was parodied in the subsequent Ocean's film.

Not as bad - though Don Cheadle's accent in Ocean's Eleven did annoy me, it didn't anger me. It's impossible to be angry with **** Van **** (this has been scientifically proven).

Film history is littered with embarrasing stabs at accents or, in the first two cases cited, no effort whatsoever to disguise the inability of the star. I don't know why Keanu's being singled out for criticism, which isn't to say I'm a fan.

Ah, if only it were just the accent that made me angry. Sadly there's a hell of a lot more than just this wrong. However, Keanu I think isn't really the villain here. My main anger is directed at the person who cast Keanu in that role.

Now if you were criticising Natalie Portman -- Oscar winning emotional void that she is -- I'd happily join in. Nothing to do with accents, but the complete inability of Ms. Portman to emote, in ANY role she's played, really makes me angry, Prof...

Fair enough. I thought Leon and V for Vendetta were great films, but can't say I've liked any of her other films (that I've seen) enough to defend her.

 

[strapped for cash]

Keanu was hardly commended for his role as Jonathan Harker, yet Portman walked away with an Oscar for her lifeless and unimaginative performance in Black Swan, in which her ineptitude was only partly disguised by the film's stupidly pyrotechnical conclusion.

I don't mind something, or someone, being bad, if it's recognised as such. It's when incompetence or mediocrity is lauded as genuis that it rankles (and this happens more often than I care to mention).

 

[The_Lhc]

I thought the whole point of Portman's character in Black Swan was that she was unable to properly express the emotion required for the part she wanted to play? Your comment would seem to suggest she did a good job.

 

[manicm]

I thought the whole point of Portman's character in Black Swan was that she was unable to properly express the emotion required for the part she wanted to play? Your comment would seem to suggest she did a good job.

+1. I thought Natalie was totally brilliant in Black Swan, but also a few of her co-stars. Don't get all her bashing here.

 

[strapped for cash]

I thought the whole point of Portman's character in Black Swan was that she was unable to properly express the emotion required for the part she wanted to play? Your comment would seem to suggest she did a good job.

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't. For an example of an actress pulling off a similar feat, see Naomi Watts in Mulholland Drive. Portman received an Oscar, Watts didn't, which is criminal in my opinion.

 

[manicm]

I thought the whole point of Portman's character in Black Swan was that she was unable to properly express the emotion required for the part she wanted to play? Your comment would seem to suggest she did a good job.

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't. For an example of an actress pulling off a similar feat, see Naomi Watts in Mulholland Drive. Portman received an Oscar, Watts didn't, which is criminal in my opinion.

Dunno, tend to disagree with you here, I thought Portman pulled off the duality very well in Black Swan, and if her performance wasn't nuanced then I don't know what else it is.

FYI, she did 6 months (or more actually) of ballet training for the movie. One has to remember that the plot is metaphorical with a very psychological bent - her turning into a swan and the other effects were not meant to be taken literally, and in that context I think her acting was very good.

I've seen Mulholland Drive and, sorry to say, I don't think Watts' performance compares to Portman's. Then again they're 2 different movies which I've both enjoyed.

 

[strapped for cash]

I thought the whole point of Portman's character in Black Swan was that she was unable to properly express the emotion required for the part she wanted to play? Your comment would seem to suggest she did a good job.

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't. For an example of an actress pulling off a similar feat, see Naomi Watts in Mulholland Drive. Portman received an Oscar, Watts didn't, which is criminal in my opinion.

Dunno, tend to disagree with you here, I thought Portman pulled off the duality very well in Black Swan, and if her performance wasn't nuanced then I don't know what else it is.

FYI, she did 6 months (or more actually) of ballet training for the movie.

I've seen Mulholland Drive and, sorry to say, I don't think Watts' performance compares to Portman's. Then again they're 2 different movies which I've both enjoyed.

I disagree, vehemently. In the spirit of the forum, I'll keep it a friendly disagreement.

And I gave credit to Portman for her dedication to ballet training. My praise ends there, however.

If Watts seems wooden through much of Mulholland Drive it's because she playing a naive ingenue inhabiting a dream for the majority of the film. Contrast this with her transformation during the audition scene and the emotional train wreck that is Diane toward the end (her real character in the film). It's a masterful performance, with emotional intelligence and subtlety far beyond Portman's range.

Mulholland Drive is one of the greatest films of the new millenium (perhaps the greatest). Black Swan is a cheap parlour trick masquerading as art.

 

[manicm]

strapped for cash - now I get you. We can certainly calmly disagree, while I enjoyed Mulholland Drive I will not pretend that its plot is anything but mediocre, nevermind 'one of the greatest films of the new millenium'. That's palpable hyperbole. I would not heap that title on Black Swan either.

 

[BenLaw]

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't.

Superb critique of the film and the acting. I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed, for exactly the reasons you say.

Black Swan is a cheap parlour trick masquerading as art.

And this summarises it in the end. I think it had a laudable aim of being artistic / arty, but ultimately fell completely flat, with a terrible script (Vincent Cassel is usually a wonderful actor, but his performance was painful to watch most of the time) and an inept performance at the centre of it. The music at the end was rousing, as it ought to be, but could not compensate for the OTT visuals, which were a desperate attempt to rescue what had gone before. (IMO!)

 

[strapped for cash]

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't.

Superb critique of the film and the acting. I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed, for exactly the reasons you say.

Black Swan is a cheap parlour trick masquerading as art.

And this summarises it in the end. I think it had a laudable aim of being artistic / arty, but ultimately fell completely flat, with a terrible script (Vincent Cassel is usually a wonderful actor, but his performance was painful to watch most of the time) and an inept performance at the centre of it. The music at the end was rousing, as it ought to be, but could not compensate for the OTT visuals, which were a desperate attempt to rescue what had gone before. (IMO!)

You're clearly a man of exceptional taste...

 

[manicm]

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't.

Superb critique of the film and the acting. I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed, for exactly the reasons you say.

Black Swan is a cheap parlour trick masquerading as art.

And this summarises it in the end. I think it had a laudable aim of being artistic / arty, but ultimately fell completely flat, with a terrible script (Vincent Cassel is usually a wonderful actor, but his performance was painful to watch most of the time) and an inept performance at the centre of it. The music at the end was rousing, as it ought to be, but could not compensate for the OTT visuals, which were a desperate attempt to rescue what had gone before. (IMO!)

You're clearly a man of exceptional taste...

...to each his own...

 

[BenLaw]

On the contrary, her character was required to make the transition from emotionally stunted, virginal "white swan" to libidinous and liberated "black swan." This was the whole point of the film, and required the kind of nuance and craft Portman lacks.

She was fine portraying the former, since she exists in an emotional vacuum (a bit like Arnie in The Terminator, whose monotone delivery was fine as he was playing a robot). This isn't acting.

However, Portman was entirely incapable of making the emotional transition her role demanded, hence the need to compensate with silly special effects (the sprouting of black feathers) and hyperkinetic camerwork (a barrage of whip-pans to assault the senses).

I'll be fair and state that Portman's dedication meant she seemed convincing as a dancer (or at least to my untrained eye).

Nevertheless, Portman was required to play two characters (or the duality of one); and she couldn't.

Superb critique of the film and the acting. I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed, for exactly the reasons you say.

Black Swan is a cheap parlour trick masquerading as art.

And this summarises it in the end. I think it had a laudable aim of being artistic / arty, but ultimately fell completely flat, with a terrible script (Vincent Cassel is usually a wonderful actor, but his performance was painful to watch most of the time) and an inept performance at the centre of it. The music at the end was rousing, as it ought to be, but could not compensate for the OTT visuals, which were a desperate attempt to rescue what had gone before. (IMO!)

You're clearly a man of exceptional taste...

...to each his own...

Lol! At least it's a film which inspires debate, which is a good thing

 

[strapped for cash]

"I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed"

Finally, I'll add that I didn't expect much, precisely because I'd put myself through the torture of watching Portman on several occasions before (I'm not sure why).

Given the critical frenzy surrounding the film, I walked into the cinema with an open mind. I was ready to be impressed and to see Portman come of age as an actress. Neither of these things happenned.

 

[strapped for cash]

I don't do hyperbole, manicm. On the very rare occasions I make grand statements, they're carefully considered. I wasn't suggesting you were heaping such praise on Black Swan, either.

The plot of Mulholland Drive is intricately crafted and more tangible than initially appears. It's not simply Lynch being abstract to the point of pretension, but a delicate and astute exploration of a damaged psyche that endlessly rewards revisitation (it's a far from cheery film, though). By comparison, one viewing of Black Swan was enough for me.

I respect, however, your right to contrary opinion...

 

[BenLaw]

"I expected a lot of the film and was sorely disappointed"

Finally, I'll add that I didn't expect much, precisely because I'd put myself through the torture of watching Portman on several occasions before (I'm not sure why).

Given the critical frenzy surrounding the film, I walked into the cinema with an open mind. I was ready to be impressed and to see Portman come of age as an actress. Neither of these things happenned.

Yeah, fair enough. I suppose it was the 'critical frenzy' and the effect of that that made me expect something good - ie lots of people seemed to me going to an 'arty' film when that doesn't normally happen, so there must be something about it. In fact, it seems to be a phenomenal example of self-perpetuating publicity (and the emperor's new clothes, with very few people having the guts to come out and say publicly how awful it was!). Plus Mark Kermode liked it, and 80-90% of the time I find my tastes align with his.

As for Portman, having a look at her films on IMDB, she seems to be someone I've mostly avoided, and found almost entirely anonymous in her films I have watched, so didn't really have an opinion on her before....