0 reactions
Dead Man's Wire is only just in cinemas now in the UK. Finding out that it could have got awards from last years' us festivals but didn't is baffling to me.
Did it literally just hit all my buttons and I'm the perfect audience for it and nobody else? Hopefully it's okay for me to post this as the megathread is now 2 months old. It had everything I like - true crime documentary film elements, high stakes ticking clock, complex categories where both are presented as simultaneously part good and part bad, a sympathetic anti-hero while it still being obvious why he's in the wrong. Finding out Richard was >!still an unrepentant piece of shit!< at the end felt both surprising and inevitable, after the development of seeing how affected he was by his POS father. Bill Skarsgard was so good, Dacre Montgomery was so good, Cary Elwes was so good, Colman Domingo was so good... I feel like this film has completely flown under the radar in the UK, is that also true of the US and why it did get much festival attention? I wouldn't see it as the type of film to get oscar noms, but lower level festivals?? surely?
In terms of a high stakes anxiety film, if I had been able to watch it around the same time as Marty Supreme there wouldn't have been a question about it for me, and most people's main criticism of the middle section of MS being outlandish doesn't apply at all; it's a very grounded, earthy film, based in a literal real life example of a guy who's had enough and going to try and push back against those above him. I also found Tony more sympathetic because rather immediately resorting to being selfish it's emphasised how long he spent before resorting to this - but at the same time, he can't help but get a little sick bit of pleasure out of finally having the upper hand. Did anyone else watch the two of them and have the same thoughts I did? I know part of the glamour of MS is that he very nearly does manage to scam his way into the upper heights, but what I liked about this is that it was so realistic - smaller guy taking on small company because they were still just big enough to screw him over, which is how it really happens. Al Pacino (who, surprise, was so good) was just as skin-crawling as Kevin O'Leary but he was actually acting and not receiving a deluded ego boost from getting to appear in the film. And you really felt sorry for everyone on the receiving end. His phone call and then commentary watching the tv later was devastating.
#video #movies
source
Did it literally just hit all my buttons and I'm the perfect audience for it and nobody else? Hopefully it's okay for me to post this as the megathread is now 2 months old. It had everything I like - true crime documentary film elements, high stakes ticking clock, complex categories where both are presented as simultaneously part good and part bad, a sympathetic anti-hero while it still being obvious why he's in the wrong. Finding out Richard was >!still an unrepentant piece of shit!< at the end felt both surprising and inevitable, after the development of seeing how affected he was by his POS father. Bill Skarsgard was so good, Dacre Montgomery was so good, Cary Elwes was so good, Colman Domingo was so good... I feel like this film has completely flown under the radar in the UK, is that also true of the US and why it did get much festival attention? I wouldn't see it as the type of film to get oscar noms, but lower level festivals?? surely?
In terms of a high stakes anxiety film, if I had been able to watch it around the same time as Marty Supreme there wouldn't have been a question about it for me, and most people's main criticism of the middle section of MS being outlandish doesn't apply at all; it's a very grounded, earthy film, based in a literal real life example of a guy who's had enough and going to try and push back against those above him. I also found Tony more sympathetic because rather immediately resorting to being selfish it's emphasised how long he spent before resorting to this - but at the same time, he can't help but get a little sick bit of pleasure out of finally having the upper hand. Did anyone else watch the two of them and have the same thoughts I did? I know part of the glamour of MS is that he very nearly does manage to scam his way into the upper heights, but what I liked about this is that it was so realistic - smaller guy taking on small company because they were still just big enough to screw him over, which is how it really happens. Al Pacino (who, surprise, was so good) was just as skin-crawling as Kevin O'Leary but he was actually acting and not receiving a deluded ego boost from getting to appear in the film. And you really felt sorry for everyone on the receiving end. His phone call and then commentary watching the tv later was devastating.
#video #movies
source
| 1,000 mlx | |
| 4 | |
| 0 |