Ray Bennett at the Hollywood Reporter gives the film a rave:
LONDON — Freckle-faced, prairie-voiced and fiercely independent, Hilary Swank’s depiction of aviator Amelia Earhart in Mira Nair’s biographical film “Amelia” is of a high order. It ranks with recent real-life portrayals of Ray Charles by Jamie Foxx and Truman Capote by Philip Seymour Hoffman and could be similarly awards-bound.
Stephanie Carroll’s handsome production design re-creates the 1920s and ’30s vividly, and Stuart Dryburgh’s cinematography captures the wild sensation of being alone high in the sky. Composer Gabriel Yared’s orchestral score — muscular in the aerial scenes, jovial where it needs to be and foreboding in its evocation of Earhart’s fate — ranks with his Academy Award-winning music for “The English Patient.”
The screenplay by Ronald Bass and Anna Hamilton Phelan is based on two books about Earhart — Susan Butler’s “East to the Dawn” and Elgin Long’s “Amelia Earhart: The Mystery Solved” — and is almost old-fashioned in its linear path. It provides as much information as is needed for those not familiar with the character without expositional clutter while taking time to show the woman’s no-nonsense approach to intimacy as well as the business of flying.
75 Responses for "First Review for Amelia"
well…Variety wasn’t as nice.
If Swank wins again…so help me…
If Swank wins again…..I will vomit in my own mouth. LOL.
Some Hullary-haters here will not be happy with this review..They were already trashing the movie and Hillary’s performance without seeing it. This means she is still in consideration and can make to the top five (I dont think she will win though!!!)
I’m getting really tired of all of the Swank hate. I don’t get it. She is a fabulous actress who has turned in two amazing performances. It is not her fault she won the Oscar twice. I really hope she is good and I hope that she gets a nomination.
Nobody is trashing Swank. They’e just saying the film looks so blatantly baity and boring, which it is.
It really doesn’t, actually. It looks big, beautiful, and sweepingly epic. A lot of us like those kinds of movies, okay?
After all the doubts and uncertainties, this might turn out to be the biggest surprise of the season. Even if the rave reviews across the board are out of the question, it is not going to be anywhere near a pan thus keeping Swank in contention.
Variety posted the first review and it wasn’t good. So I’m guessing this will go like Where the Wild Things Are.
a Third Oscar for Hilary? An Oscar Nom is almost certain, there isn’t much competition in the field this year
I think that Hillary Swank will be nominated for Amelia, but not gonna win ( Not a third one in ten years and three nominations, and i wanna be clear that i don’t hate the girl ). That only makes the way so much clear to Meryl Streep, and her third oscar, because the academy don’t gonna give the award to Helen Mirren, again, and let’s be honest, nobody gonna give the award to Carey Mulligan, Gabby Sidibe or Abbie Cornish, because they are very unknow, and in five years nobody gonna remember them if they win, and that’s so boring, you know when somebody wins and then just vanished from movie bussiness.
I agree. She’ll get a nomination but not win. IMO AMPAS are acutely aware of her two wins.
Best Actress is a mystery to me but I can definitley say that a nod for Swank is very possible at this point. It’s a weak year and there’s not alot of people at the table. I can also agree with some of you who are saying that a win for her is very unlikely. I don’t think she’s gonna win again but the nod is almost set in stone.
If she won, she’d be the second person of all time to get 3 lead acting Oscars. Is she one of the two greatest actors of all time? No, she is not.
I am biased because I think Million Dollar Baby is really not good. Kate Winslet’s performance was very, very amazing and one of my favorite perfs of all time. Staunton was quite good too. Though I don’t care too much about the BP win just because I don’t like the other nominees too much, Swank was just ugh. For 1999, Streep & Moore are also much better actresses…
However, I don’t think that, for people who don’t closely follow Oscars, this would be a total shocker for Best Picture nom. It’s a stereotypically Oscar-y subject movie with some very big stars. Most people don’t know what is or isn’t being talked about; they just see movies when they come out.
AMPAS are acutely aware of her two wins.
They might have forgotten about M$B, because I can’t imagine anybody watching that movie more than once.
How in the world is it a weak year? Streep, Cornish, Sidibe, Mulligan, Mirren, Swank, Ronan, Monaghan, Cotillard; these are all real contenders. And strong ones at that.
And I’ve proudly seen “Million Dollar Baby” twice, and would easily watch it again. Really powerful. Depressing, yes, but the kind of emotional movie you like feeling sad about.
yes, i think it’s a strong year for lead actress performances too.
The first review was from Variety and it was a terrible “flop” review. I have a feeling most reviews will follow in Variety’s footsteps.
IMO Monaghan’s film isn’t generating alot of buzz as of now; it will be forgotten. Plus, Mirren and Cotillard are both going supporting.
btw…M$B was great and I have seen it many times.
What are the odds Bening will be nominated again, along with Swank?
Monaghan’s film has crashed and burned at the box office (which is saying something since it is still in teeny limited release). She is screwed as far as a nomination.
I think the oveall critical response to Amelia will be mixed, but a best actress nomination for Swank is very likely and I even think a best picture nod is possible as well. “Ray” did not get breathless, critical praise–it was carried into the final 5 by the sole performance of Jamie Foxx. I don’t know if Swank’s performance is of that caliber, but I wouldn’t count out a best pic nom just yet.
I’ve been thinking Amelia will be that Oscar bait bio film AMPAS will fall for. The same way they felt for The Queen and Frost/Nixon. I too am not counting it out of the big race just yet.
@11, Leonardo:
I think it’s a little premature to predict that Carey Mulligan, Abbie Cornish, and Gabby Sidibe will not be remembered five years from now. We have no way of knowing what their future careers will look like. In five years time, one or more of them may be a huge star.
And the Academy occasionally does recognize a previously unheralded young actress with their Best Actress Oscar. One that comes immediately to mind: Hilary Swank for “Boys Don’t Cry.”
Somehow I am feeling that An Education is not creating the buzz it was supposed to create. I know it is in limited release, but being New York City we always hear about those limited releases more than other cities. And so far noone around me seems to care about that movie, and two people already told me that they were expecting more from that movie (expectation disconfirmation is a problem!!!). I personally liked the movie but i dont think it is one of the best movies of the year!
“They might have forgotten about M$B, because I can’t imagine anybody watching that movie more than once.”
Lol Ryan. They might have forgotten about M$B but I bet those geezers still remember that plunging back dress. Maybe they’ll think she’ll deliver a front-show this time. You can’t ask for a better reason than that to give someone an Oscar.
Robert, Hillary Swank was not that unknow actress in the US at the time of her first oscar, she was in Beverly Hills 90210 for some time, and made the Karate Kid movie, ok both aren’t her finest, but wasn’t that unkown like these other three girls. My point is that Carey Mulligan, Abbie Cornish, and Gabby Sidibe don’t seem to me like the kind of leading ladies that will survive the test of time, they look more like “one hit wonders” to me. They don’t have the proyection of a Meryl Streep or the same Hillary Swank at the time she won for Boys Don’t Cry. Is just my opinion, maybe the time will give me the reason or maybe i’m totally wrong, let’s just wait.
Robert, Hillary Swank was not that unknow actress in the US at the time of her first oscar, she was in Beverly Hills 90210 for some time, and made the Karate Kid movie, ok both wasn’t her finest, but wasn’t that unkown like these other three girls. My point is that Carey Mulligan, Abbie Cornish, and Gabby Sidibe don’t seem to me like the kind of leading ladies that will survive the test of time, they look more like “one hit wonders” to me. They don’t have the proyection of a Meryl Streep or the same Hillary Swank at the time she won for Boys Don’t Cry. Is just my opinion, maybe the time will give me the reason or maybe i’m totally wrong, let’s just wait.
And so it begins…
“Plus, Mirren and Cotillard are both going supporting.”
Nu-uh, not from what I’m hearing.
Million Dollar Baby and Mystic River had to be two of the most overrated movies of all time. Neither Swank nor Penn should have won for their roles — the performances were equally overrated.
It is amazing how often the Academy gets it wrong, and how often they must tailor awards in subsequent years to compensate for their mistakes.
“Amelia” may be intriguing…but frankly I’m a little tired of Hillary Swank.
i think like almost every drama being released at this time of the year, it’s trying to be oscar bait.
i actually LOVE million dollar baby…i’ve seen it a few times.
and i’m sorry but she deserved the oscar for boys don’t cry and i don’t think her award for million dollar baby was undeserving…yes, i liked other performances better but she was still very good in it.
but no way will she win. i really think this is meryl’s year…
I too am sick of Hilary Swink. Give Meryl her third Oscar!
GO HILLARY!
I think Streep will have the one-two punch with J&J and It’s Complicated. Two comedic roles to be a strong contrast the dramatic chops of Sophie’s Choice.
I saw An Education this week. I really love the film, but it will be lucky to make $10million. I saw this at the Arclight in Hollywood and the audience chatter walking out was not too positive, but again, I did love it. With regard to Mulligan, while she is very good, it doesn’t have that BIG Oscar scene. I don’t think she will win, but nomination is well deserved.
Not the biggest fan of Swank after her overpraised performance in M$B won over the exemplary performances of Winslet and Staunton that year, but she’s a likable actress who’s very down to earth, and she delivered a heartbreaking performance in Boys Don’t Cry that was very deserving of an Oscar.
I think she’s got a excellent chance of getting nominated this year, considering AMPAS’s worship of biopic roles. But I will admit that the prospects of her going 3/3 and having more Oscar wins than the likes of Streep, Bette Davis, Vivian Leigh, Ingrid Bergman, and Maggie Smith makes me ill inside.
I love my Oscar stats and odds as much as the next guy, but I gotta say…
I’m a little burned out on the politics.
Will they skip her, so she DOESN’T get to claim 3/3 in ten years? I don’t know. Will her nomination be deemed “enough of a win already”? I don’t know. Will she lose beacuse “It’s Meryl’s year?” I don’t know that either.
As a non-Swank fan, even I have to say: let’s wait and see the movie! lol
Well I’m sick of Meryl fanatics, so I’d LOVE to see Hilary win a third just to piss them off.
But seriously, if she deserves it I hope she wins.
I loved the two movies that Hilary Swank won her Oscars for she deserved them in my opinion – I didn’t like Julie and Julia – now I am Australian so don’t know anything about Julia Childs so I had no idea about her at all but that voice seriously irritated me.
I will wait and see Amelia before I offer my opinion.
I hope that Michelle Pffeifer will win her deserved Oscar for her terrific role in Cheri¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
Oscar for Michelle Pffeifer¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
Hilary in M$B is overrated? It’s underrated, if anything, since it receives such a barrage of undeserved bitterness whenever it’s brought up. An excellent performance, fully deserving of the Oscar.
Kate Winslet’s performance in Eternal Sunshine has got to be the most overrated of the decade. That year was Swank vs. Staunton. If anyone’s been over-recognised by AMPAS, it’s Winslet (she’s great, but Little Children? Titanic? please).
I have an odd feeling about ‘Amelia’ … though it won’t get crazy high numbers in Metacritic and/or RT …. will have juussstt enough people who love it that this will be the film that ‘Australia’ hoped it would be last year.
I LOVED ‘Australia’, and I know a lot of people do. But the film didn’t bring in the noms it would have ‘hoped’ for.
THIS film, detractors and all, I still could see 3-4 noms, if not many more:
Swank, Cinematography (Dryburgh), Art Direction, Score (Yared), etc.
And on another note: Hilary Swank. I don’t think she’s the second coming (as an actress). I also think she probably only deserved 1 of her 2 wins. But I do think she’s a fine actress. And it’s true what people have said before … lots of “GREATS” have won multiple Oscars with less-than-stellar performances in average movies.
IMO, Swank is getting all those noms (and wins) because she`s very low key in personal life as is her work between Oscary stuff. No big bombs that make late night punchlines nor big hits in terrible blockbusters. So it looks like she always hits the target when her movie gets attention. Illusion of consistency. Or something. I don`t recall that she had a Stepford Wives-like embarrassment on her resume. Nor she`s overpaid and constantly in media. I guess that helps down the line aside doing an actual great job with the roles. You know, she seems to be an actress not actress-movie star or just a movie star.
That said, lets not forget that she won twice for roles that required physical transformation. Amelia has nothing of that kind, so, IMO, it slims down her chances of a third win if third nom happens.
I’m more interested in the movie that Mira Nair has been trying to make for the last few years – an adaptation of the memoir ‘Shantaram’ about an Australian criminal who escaped from custody and ended up in India, and subsequently became a functionary in the Mumbai underworld mafia.
Whoever compared Where the Wild Things Are and Amelia are way off base. WTWTA was not made to win Oscars. Amelia clearly was.
And I am still bitter about Winslet losing for Eternal Sunshine, that was (in my opinion) her best performance to date. That whole movie deserved much more than it got that year.
So yes, if Swank does win her third Oscar before Meryl Streep, I will be very upset. The fact that she has more Oscars than Kate Winslet is bad enough already.
*************************************
Student of The World
October 18th, 2009 at 11:21 pm 28
And so it begins…
*************************************
-I second that, StudentoftheWorld. Whatever the next statement after that. I still second it.
******************************************************
Mike
October 19th, 2009 at 4:24 am 37
Well I’m sick of Meryl fanatics, so I’d LOVE to see Hilary win a third just to piss them off.
But seriously, if she deserves it I hope she wins.
****************************************************
-That was funny, Mike, ‘…just to piss them off’. You know, it’s the Meryl fanatics and some critics, who are longtime friends of Meryl Streep, who are OVERRATING her. What I mean by that is everytime Meryl Streep comes out with a movie, you people are raving and raving about it eventhough it’s clearly an average performance. Sure, I know you people want her to get her truly deserved 3rd Oscar but not for unworthy performances like The Devil wears Prada, Doubt, J and J. I hope she makes a movie where she can relax her ‘external’ skills. What I mean by this is what Katharine Hepburn(IMDB) thinks of her . She said of Streep, ’she’s always searching’. And yes she is. That is all evident in her most recent movies. I hope she can play a character where she ‘internalizes’. Everything is coming from the inside(what the character is feeling, thinking, emoting, etc). Stop the physical constant gestures and facial movement. Just like that character Diane Keaton played in Marvin’s Room. I think that’s the reason Keaton got the nomination instead of Streep. AMPAS took note of that. Ive never seen Keaton played a role like that and she pulled it off.
That’s why Swank and Field got those two Best Actress trophies. They played simple characters but it’s powerfully filled with deep emotions and feelings everyone can relate to.
******************************************************
bambi
October 19th, 2009 at 9:13 am 42
IMO, Swank is getting all those noms (and wins) because she`s very low key in personal life as is her work between Oscary stuff. No big bombs that make late night punchlines nor big hits in terrible blockbusters. So it looks like she always hits the target when her movie gets attention. Illusion of consistency. Or something. I don`t recall that she had a Stepford Wives-like embarrassment on her resume. Nor she`s overpaid and constantly in media. I guess that helps down the line aside doing an actual great job with the roles. You know, she seems to be an actress not actress-movie star or just a movie star.
******************************************************
-i agree with everything you said about swank, bambi!
What’s with this whole “Movie was only made to win Oscars” = a big, bad thing.
I freaking LOVE the Oscars and all the glitz, glamour, prestige, and bigness they offer (isn’t that why we’re here?). I’ve watched them since forever and have equally loved my Epics as much as my Slumdogs, as well as my Rain Mans, as well as my Little Miss Sunshines, etc.
So if something is deemed “Oscar bait”, and is released after September … who cares?
Does a biopic about Amelia Earhart which takes place in the 20s/30s, and includes aerial footage sound appealing to me? Hell, yeah. Will it to others? No. But that’s life.
People can love a ‘Couples Retreat’, they can love a ‘Precious’, and they can love an ‘Amelia’.
That doesn’t automatically mean that ‘Precious’ will be the best movie of the 3 just because it isn’t commercial fare OR Oscar-y. And it doesn’t mean that you won’t have a great time relaxing & laughing during a ‘Couples Retreat’.
My overall point is: there is such disdain for period pieces/epics ONLY because people have this urge for change and cast away rewarding an old-fashioned sense of ‘cinema’ (no matter how good or bad the movie may wind up being).
The period pieces may snatch nominations from non-Oscar bait, and whether or not it’s good, people get rreeeaalllyy annoyed by that; annoyingly so.
Quality is quality, no matter if it’s Oscar bait or not. If ‘Amelia’ is good, then damn it – it deserves everything it gets. If it’s bad, then it deserves nothing.
Leonardo, what a stupid thing to say. Sidibe will probably be forgotten but Mulligan and Cornish are two rising stars, Mulligan especially is on her way to becoming a huge star, She has already been cast in movies directed by Rob Redford and Oliver Stone, she is being hailed as the new Audrey Hepburn.
“It is amazing how often the Academy gets it wrong, and how often they must tailor awards in subsequent years to compensate for their mistakes”.
Diana, you disagreeing with their choices doesn’t mean they are wrong. Grow up. Your opinions are not fact.
Movies shouldn’t be made to win awards. They should be made to tell stories, to change cinema… not to contend at the Oscars.
Well, call me the minority, but I disagree, Georgie.
Firstly, I don’t think most of these Oscar-bait movies are initially made with intentions of Oscar “glory”.
Secondly, and on my own personal front, the story within ‘Amelia’ appeals to me more than the story within, say, ‘Precious’. And I’m sure there will be tons of people who have that mentality. Everyone is different and has their own tastes.
‘Precious’ should win awards if it’s that good, just as ‘Amelia’ should win the awards if it happens to be good.
All that said ….. I may not like ‘Amelia’, and I may wind up LOVING ‘Precious’.
But I’m not looking for cinema “to change” the world if I already appreciate and enjoy the ‘Amelia’ types.
I don’t think I’m getting my thoughts across properly. I just don’t like the dismissive attitude these days of ‘Amelia’-type movies – like they’re an Oscar plague or something.
Ricky:
Yes, Mulligan has already been cast in movies directed by Rob Redford and Oliver Stone, and she was in Public Enemies too, but all are supporting roles, because she doesn`t look like a leading lady, and roles like An Education are just an exception,and that is why i say that is so boring to give an oscar to a “one hit wonder”, and in the case of Swank, she never looks like a “one hit wonder”, and history show us that was true. And the fact that she looks like Audrey Hepburn, is just for the hair style in the movie, and Academy doesn’t give awards for hair style.
And hey, is just my opinion, maybe the time will give me the reason or maybe i’m totally wrong, but that don’t make me stupid, after all i’m not a critic, just a movie fan.
leonardo,
I disagree completely. She is being dubbed the new hot thing in Hollywood(even Anna Wintour loves her), and unlike past people who have gotten that title Mulligan can actually act… She is going places. Phillip Seymour Hoffman doesn’t look like a leading man and yet he is no one hit wonder. Actually most say she is the new Audrey because of her general look and her charm, not sure if she has Audrey’s grace.
How can you predict the future? Cornish, Mulligan, ect., are new, but that doesn’t mean they are one hit wonders. To fit into that category they would have to make more films that turn out to be flops, but since we can’t see into the future, and their careers have just begun, your logic is flawed.
Many thought that Marisa Tomei was a one hit after My Cousin Vinny, but they were wrong.
Still have no interest in seeing this. I would love to see Richard Gere cast in a comedy playing kind of a prick. In other words the same character he played in Pretty Woman just playing him as a dick and for laughs. I think he would be brilliant. Put him in the hands of someone like Judd Apatow.
I love Hilary Swank and nominated or not Im one of those people who for sure will turn out to the theatre to see Amelia. How can some of you be tired of Hilary is still amazes me. It’s not like she is making movie after movie. She is very intelligent and she is really trying to get better roles. Her being a double Oscar winner at her young age is amazing to me but very well deserved. She didn’t get “lucky”, she just deserved them. You know who Im tired of??? That ridiculous idea that having BEYONCE perform year after year is going to better the ratings. This woman is awful when it comes to performing at the Oscars. She should be banned. Let the nominees sing for once, they’re the ones that deserve that recognizion not someone who Im so tired of listening to on the radio EVERY f*@#$g day!.
Even if Streep pulls off a win in the Best Actress category that still only gives her two BA awards. Yeps she’ll have three Oscars but the third is a Supporting. It’s the Ingrid Bergman Sydrome. In my opinion I think that Streep is held up to a higher bench mark than a lot of actresses just because of her own body of work. How many “Out of Africa’s or Ironweed’s” Has Swank or for that matter can any other actress put on a resume except maybe Kat Hepburn. The only other actresses that came close to having a really good run on film roles were Olivia de Havilland or Deborah Kerr. Deborah Kerr never won an Oscar yet she pulled off 3 NYFC awards and was nominated for an Oscar six times.
The moment Streeps name is mentioned everyone drags out the “method or internalization thing”. I’d rather see the internalization than some of the other one hit wonders.
We have a tendency to hold those we truly consider “gifted” to a higher standard.
First of all, I hear comments about not giving the Oscar to a one-hit wonder. The Oscar should go to the best performance of the year as voted by their peers.
Thus, if an actor only makes one film, in his or her lifetime, and it is the best of the year-he or she deserves it.
People should stop hating on Hillary, she is a fine actress, and according to her peers, deserved her Oscars.
I love Meryl also-a brilliant actress-but sometimes one is nominated in the wrong year, when the peers feel someone else is more deserving that year.
Now if Hillary and Annette Benning are both nominated this year, if I were you Hillary haters, I’d be afraid, very afraid.
Nic, I completely agree.
Swank being low key only helps her. She does bring a lot of down to earth charm (luckiest girl in the world attitude) to her acceptance speeches. She manages to make everyone in the room feel happy for her.
As much as I would have liked to see Winslet or Stauton win, I didn’t mind her second win because that’s only Oscar M$B realistically deserved.
Remember “The Core”?
Only bomb that comes to mind.
Sasha, I’ve been with your site from the beginning and I must say over the years I’ve heard some pretty ridiculous reasons from your forum writers as to why an actor or actress should not win an Oscar, here are my top ten:
1. They were in a crappy TV series.
2. They are comics and or singers.
3. They’re too young.
4. They have a bad movie coming out the same year.
5. They’re too fat/skinny
6. They are a one-hit wonder
7. They just recently won
8. They’re too ethnic
9. They’re ugly or too pretty.
10. They won’t give a good acceptance speech
“Movies shouldn’t be made to win awards. They should be made to tell stories, to change cinema… not to contend at the Oscars.”
I totally agree, its too bad that Amelia fails to do any of those things. If Hilary Swank gets nominated for basically dressing up like Amelia Earhart and walking around for 2 hours it would be a sad and frankly insulting commentary on the sheer lack of juicy roles for females in Hollywood.
By the way, another rotten review came out for this movie. Here’s the quote I agree with the most:
“Nair can’t give us more than a handsome press release for a woman who didn’t like explaining her achievements beyond, ‘I want to do it because I want to do it.’”
“…a lot of down to earth charm (luckiest girl in the world attitude) to her acceptance speeches. She manages to make everyone in the room feel happy for her.”
Everyone except Chad Lowe.
Within The Whirlwind is getting a screening next month at The Boston Jewish Film Festival, where no doubt it will be reviewed and possibly bought by a distributor enough in time to put Emily Watson back into the discussion. Everybody is so positive it will be Mulligan, Streep, Cornish, Sidibe and Swank and it’s only October. I would love to see someone we aren’t talking about now show up and surprise and get a nomination. I’m tired of the last few years where the Oscar was already won in October.
Linda, I highly doubt it’s possible that a film that gets picked up in November has enough time to be released and have a proper Oscar campaign by December.
I don’t think there’s a set 5.
Seems to me like aside from Mulligan & Streep it COULD be …
Sidibe, Cotillard, Swank, Mirren, Ronan, Watson, Swinton, Cornish, Bening, and others that have been mentioned.
Some are mentioning Annette Bening, but does Mother and Child have distribution???
Yea, I won’t hold my breath for Within the Whirlwind either.
And I really don’t get the campaign for The Last Station. Mirren goes lead and Plummer supporting?. If you ask me, it makes no sense.
Ryan, at least Chad Lowe has his paltry Emmy to keep him company.
I want to clarify something. I wasn’t saying that Hilary Swank wasn’t a good actress. Personally what I’ve seen of Amelia whispers BORING. And just because the film is boring doesn’t mean a performance can’t be good. But a good performance in a boring film doesn’t usually get you an Oscar Nom. Keyword “usually”. Specially in a year where there are really some performances in films that have already caught attention.
I have to admit I wasn’t a big fan of Hilary Swanks. I didn’t want to see Boys Don’t Cry or M$B. But I have to admit when I saw both films, when my head was ready to see them I came away with an entirely different appreciation for Swank. There’s no question in my mind the woman is gifted. But lets face facts Hilary Swank is limited. She’s the Iron Jaw Maiden type. Which is why Amelia is perfect for her.
And I gotta tell ya I really liked PS I Love You. It’s light and airy. Has some great dialogue. Swank was the weakest link in the film but I didn’t care. It’s one of those films you just sit back and enjoy without a lot of expectations. Like a lot of Sandra Bullock movies. You just enjoy them. And that’s what film is all about anyway. Entertainment.
Jida…I remember when Million Dollar Baby had such a secrecy about it and low key production, it caught most people by surprise when it came out, there was no hype like Mystic or Gran Torino and hardly played if any film fests and it just came out in limited fashion in December. So you never know. All I was meaning is Emily looks to really be bringing it in a true story of horrific situations that people deserve to see the performance and I think a portrayal like that would grab hold of you and make a larger impression and burn longer in your mind more than say Mulligan or Sidibe.
Very possible Linda, but Million Dollar Baby did have Warner Bros behind it fully the entire production. It wasn’t an acquisition in any way. Within the Whirlwind may do exactly what you say but I still feel that if it’s picked up it will be pushed back into next year.
the movie, amelia, is a biopic movie
just like capote
the real people bein potrayed are not entertainers nor
Hollywood stars
unlike ray, who is a singer entertainer and you expect to be entertained
havin said this it proves that these people sayin the movie is boring are biased, whether they have seen the movie amelia or not
There’s somebody who seen AMELIA and says it is “BORING”
http://newyork.timeout.com/articles/film/79808/amelia-film-review#ixzz0Ua5a3jes
Yeah, I expected Time Out to really love Amelia. Uh….these aren’t the reviews that really matter in the Oscar race. They matter to you and to web readers and to the world culture at large but when it comes to Oscar – you have to look for the mainstreamers. At any rate, it might bomb – but I’ll wait for a couple of majors to ring in before deciding it’s so.
I think reviews do only matter in case of the Academy Awards to get the members attention to actually see those movies – but they (the members) don´t necessarily follow the critic´s taste.
But then, if the critics really pan a movie (and this could be the case with “Amelia”), the academy is kind of frightened to loose their credibility in nominating such a critics looser and shy away from it.
The worrisome thing is that they’re apparently keeping it hidden from mainstream critics until after it opens. That feels less like “old-school marketing” and more like “wolverine marketing,” but we’ll have to wait and see.
Emmanuel Levy, again no mainstreamer, but a fairly reliable fellow we regularly quote:
Leave a reply