|
Post by HaurvatatL on Apr 28, 2021 19:34:14 GMT
just so happy. y'all know what the film means to me, thank you for the topic.
I'll go buy flowers myself.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Dedlock on Apr 28, 2021 22:29:14 GMT
there are so many scenes in this film, and they all are great but Meryl's were the weakest, let us give Julianne Moore some credit, I really loved her scenes with Toni Collette, "oh kitty". Can you guys believe Toni Collete is also in this move lol!
|
|
|
Post by HaurvatatL on Apr 28, 2021 23:05:07 GMT
there are so many scenes in this film, and they all are great but Meryl's were the weakest, let us give Julianne Moore some credit, I really loved her scenes with Toni Collette, "oh kitty". Can you guys believe Toni Collete is also in this move lol! after the 20~22 time I watched, (can't remember the actual number) I found Moore's part is the weakest. even I laughed at Meryl's kitchen "stomachache" scene for many years, but it suddenly made sense to me. for a woman, the man, the love of her life luv that intruder, and he even shows off like I got better choice than the man now. I understand that angry and hatred and shame and sadness of hers, at the moment. even if she burns the whole building right there, there's not "too much" for that performance. so she let Richard die. think about it, if she tells him Louise is in the town, I think that's the last weapon to stop him jump off.. the kitchen scene is she finally admit the love of her life won't love her back in the way she needs. so she let him go, with "let go" and "killing intent" both in it, in my opinion. it's hard to any human being. the Moore part on the other hand, is too melodramaly winded up, yet other two are in this more and more stronger path. even the brush teeth scene is weaker than "its copycat" which is Kate calling Leo before she does her own abortion in Revolutionary Road. and the acting level too, I don't think Meryl got beat by Julianne anymore, becuz Juliannes' lack of story line strength, I prefer Meryl's more.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Dedlock on Apr 28, 2021 23:49:42 GMT
I felt for Julianne more than meryl's character. but i'll give it a revisit soon, and see.
|
|
|
Post by Ventura on Apr 29, 2021 2:49:46 GMT
As per usual, Streep didn't understand her assignment. In a film filled with subtlety and inner turmoil, Streep just takes the easy way out, yelling and bemoaning while the opera is on blast. I go back and forth with this, but I would've given Moore the Oscar for The Hours, this year. I love CZJ in Chicago, and I love Far From Heaven, too, but it's Laura Brown the one that's stuck with me the longest. I think her scenes in The Hours are life-changing.
|
|
|
Post by zazzsquad on Apr 29, 2021 3:34:25 GMT
there are so many scenes in this film, and they all are great but Meryl's were the weakest, let us give Julianne Moore some credit, I really loved her scenes with Toni Collette, "oh kitty". Can you guys believe Toni Collete is also in this move lol! after the 20~22 time I watched, (can't remember the actual number) I found Moore's part is the weakest. even I laughed at Meryl's kitchen "stomachache" scene for many years, but it suddenly made sense to me. for a woman, the man, the love of her life luv that intruder, and he even shows off like I got better choice than the man now. I understand that angry and hatred and shame and sadness of hers, at the moment. even if she burns the whole building right there, there's not "too much" for that performance. so she let Richard die. think about it, if she tells him Louise is in the town, I think that's the last weapon to stop him jump off.. the kitchen scene is she finally admit the love of her life won't love her back in the way she needs. so she let him go, with "let go" and "killing intent" both in it, in my opinion. it's hard to any human being. the Moore part on the other hand, is too melodramaly winded up, yet other two are in this more and more stronger path. even the brush teeth scene is weaker than "its copycat" which is Kate calling Leo before she does her own abortion in Revolutionary Road. and the acting level too, I don't think Meryl got beat by Julianne anymore, becuz Juliannes' lack of story line strength, I prefer Meryl's more. For me, those roles very different, and each actress rises to the challenge. Streep's is the lightest character of the three and she's meant to provide gravitas, but I don't think she's failed in any way. Kidman, however, had the most challenging task as her character is the most vivid and dramatic, and I'm super glad she won for this particular role. Moore for me was better in Far from Heaven, but only because she had more to do there (lead role, etc).
|
|
|
Post by To Die For on Apr 29, 2021 7:53:33 GMT
My TOP 2 favorite movie of all time. And I’ve watched it every year since I discovered it in 2010.
- The writing was genius - I already read the original novel and thought David Hare’s own adaptation was spellbinding. Pure magic on every level. It's a crime he did not win an Oscars.
- The score of Phillip Glass was out of this world. He lost the Oscars for THIS? Huh?
- And Nicole Kidman blessed us with one of the best performances of all time. Totally deserved win.
|
|
|
Post by misstoker on Apr 29, 2021 8:05:02 GMT
My TOP 2 favorite movie of all time. And I’ve watched it every year since I discovered it in 2010. - The writing was genius - I already read the original novel and thought David Hare’s own adaptation was spellbinding. Pure magic on every level. It's a crime he did not win an Oscars. - The score of Phillip Glass was out of this world. He lost the Oscars for THIS? Huh? - And Nicole Kidman blessed us with one of the best performances of all time. Totally deserved win. The Hours should have won every Oscar was nominated that year, but since it's a really unconventional movie I think we got lucky enough for all prizes it got. A movie like 'I'm not there' that wasn't even close to the quality of the hours, but they share the same narrative of unconventional biopic, got only a nom for Blanchett. But yes, it should have won Score for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Dedlock on Apr 29, 2021 8:28:52 GMT
With trent reznor winning an academy award every year something is really off with the academy members who choose best score.
|
|
|
Post by WizLemon on Apr 29, 2021 9:24:12 GMT
In my humble opinion, The Hours is one of those rare occurrences where the screen adaptation was richer and fuller than the source material - which in itself was a beautifully written book.
Phillip Glass's minimalist score is so apt for this story. It's haunting, without overwhelming the narrative and becomes a perfect 'glue' that binds all three storylines together.
I think I have no qualms in saying, every single performance in that movie was superlative and extraordinary. They were perfectly chosen and employed. Kidman's pain, Moore's longing and Streep's passion - what an absolute masterclass. The supporting cast is chock-full of talent - I mean Ed Harris, Toni Collette, Miranda Richardson, Claire Danes, Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels, John C Reilly.
With an estimated budget of $25 million, the film eventually earned ~$42 million in America and $67million in foreign markets for a total worldwide box office of ~$109 million! Can you believe it? An experimental, not so commercial movie like that, earning that much, in this day and age?
I also do have to take the opportunity here to mention, I can see why it's not a wildly popular movie. It's not a comfortable watch. The narrative is not linear. It can be depressing. The score for some, can sound very overtly melodramatic and self-important. I see why some people found the prosthetic nose distracting. I also understand people questioning who gets lead actress/who was supporting?
But I love this movie so, so much. It stays with me for such a long time, every time I watch it. It's the stuff of dreams. Truly remarkable cinema.
|
|
|
Post by zazzsquad on Apr 29, 2021 13:03:57 GMT
With trent reznor winning an academy award every year something is really off with the academy members who choose best score. It's so baffling indeed. The social network ost was great but that's because electronica is reznor's forte, and it fit perfectly with the modern storytelling of sorkin and fincher's fast-paced tempo. But i did not care for anything this team has produced since. And i gone girl their work even annoyed me because it was distracting and just... bad.
|
|
|
Post by zazzsquad on Apr 29, 2021 13:06:16 GMT
In my humble opinion, The Hours is one of those rare occurrences where the screen adaptation was richer and fuller than the source material - which in itself was a beautifully written book. Phillip Glass's minimalist score is so apt for this story. It's haunting, without overwhelming the narrative and becomes a perfect 'glue' that binds all three storylines together. I think I have no qualms in saying, every single performance in that movie was superlative and extraordinary. They were perfectly chosen and employed. Kidman's pain, Moore's longing and Streep's passion - what an absolute masterclass. The supporting cast is chock-full of talent - I mean Ed Harris, Toni Collette, Miranda Richardson, Claire Danes, Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels, John C Reilly. With an estimated budget of $25 million, the film eventually earned ~$42 million in America and $67million in foreign markets for a total worldwide box office of ~$109 million! Can you believe it? An experimental, not so commercial movie like that, earning that much, in this day and age? I also do have to take the opportunity here to mention, I can see why it's not a wildly popular movie. It's not a comfortable watch. The narrative is not linear. It can be depressing. The score for some, can sound very overtly melodramatic and self-important. I see why some people found the prosthetic nose distracting. I also understand people questioning who gets lead actress/who was supporting? But I love this movie so, so much. It stays with me for such a long time, every time I watch it. It's the stuff of dreams. Truly remarkable cinema. I honestly couldnt care less for anyone who doesnt like the hours. They just need to educate themselves and elevate their taste in cinema. The movie is brilliant. And i really hope daldry and kidman work again (i still think she she would have got her second oscar for the reader and would have given a better and more interesting performance than winslet).
|
|
|
Post by HaurvatatL on Apr 29, 2021 14:15:32 GMT
In my humble opinion, The Hours is one of those rare occurrences where the screen adaptation was richer and fuller than the source material - which in itself was a beautifully written book. Phillip Glass's minimalist score is so apt for this story. It's haunting, without overwhelming the narrative and becomes a perfect 'glue' that binds all three storylines together. I think I have no qualms in saying, every single performance in that movie was superlative and extraordinary. They were perfectly chosen and employed. Kidman's pain, Moore's longing and Streep's passion - what an absolute masterclass. The supporting cast is chock-full of talent - I mean Ed Harris, Toni Collette, Miranda Richardson, Claire Danes, Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels, John C Reilly. With an estimated budget of $25 million, the film eventually earned ~$42 million in America and $67million in foreign markets for a total worldwide box office of ~$109 million! Can you believe it? An experimental, not so commercial movie like that, earning that much, in this day and age? I also do have to take the opportunity here to mention, I can see why it's not a wildly popular movie. It's not a comfortable watch. The narrative is not linear. It can be depressing. The score for some, can sound very overtly melodramatic and self-important. I see why some people found the prosthetic nose distracting. I also understand people questioning who gets lead actress/who was supporting? But I love this movie so, so much. It stays with me for such a long time, every time I watch it. It's the stuff of dreams. Truly remarkable cinema. I honestly couldnt care less for anyone who doesnt like the hours. They just need to educate themselves and elevate their taste in cinema. The movie is brilliant. And i really hope daldry and kidman work again (i still think she she would have got her second oscar for the reader and would have given a better and more interesting performance than winslet). so true.
|
|
|
Post by raneto on Apr 29, 2021 17:59:37 GMT
So great, I love this film. I'm reading right now the novel itself and Mrs Dalloway together, it's quite a experience. In the end I will watch the movie, it's been a while now that I saw it the last time. I did the same many years ago. Mrs Dalloway is such a phenomenal book! I hope you are enjoying it as much as I did. Perro, yes, the book is phenomenal, I'm loving it. It's interesting how Cunningham takes names, situations and feelings from Mrs Dalloway, and not only the plot, but the way of writting, the structure. I'm not comparing Woolf to him lol, but it is a beautiful job what he did, and the film encapsulated the soul of the book in a gorgeous way, it is really a very good adaptation. I recommend to you guys here to do this one day, read The Hours, Mrs Dalloway and then watch the film. I'm still reading Mrs Dalloway - sad because it's almost finished - but I remember very vividly a lot of scenes and can tell that it is a incredible adaptation. It is absurd that the film did not win Sountrack and Editing, at least, at the Oscars in 2003.
|
|
|
Post by raneto on Apr 29, 2021 18:04:54 GMT
In my humble opinion, The Hours is one of those rare occurrences where the screen adaptation was richer and fuller than the source material - which in itself was a beautifully written book. Phillip Glass's minimalist score is so apt for this story. It's haunting, without overwhelming the narrative and becomes a perfect 'glue' that binds all three storylines together. I think I have no qualms in saying, every single performance in that movie was superlative and extraordinary. They were perfectly chosen and employed. Kidman's pain, Moore's longing and Streep's passion - what an absolute masterclass. The supporting cast is chock-full of talent - I mean Ed Harris, Toni Collette, Miranda Richardson, Claire Danes, Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels, John C Reilly. With an estimated budget of $25 million, the film eventually earned ~$42 million in America and $67million in foreign markets for a total worldwide box office of ~$109 million! Can you believe it? An experimental, not so commercial movie like that, earning that much, in this day and age? I also do have to take the opportunity here to mention, I can see why it's not a wildly popular movie. It's not a comfortable watch. The narrative is not linear. It can be depressing. The score for some, can sound very overtly melodramatic and self-important. I see why some people found the prosthetic nose distracting. I also understand people questioning who gets lead actress/who was supporting? But I love this movie so, so much. It stays with me for such a long time, every time I watch it. It's the stuff of dreams. Truly remarkable cinema. Very well said, Wiz, I don't remember watching a so good adaptation in recent years. And this type of movie, with this budget, it is not being made anymore, right? Gosh, almost 20 years already. One of the last performances from Streep that I really liked. All the cast, it is incredible.
|
|