It is pretty amazing to see a film earn such unanimous praise. The Wrestler currently enjoys a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Metacritic still hovers at a chilly 83 and it’s debatable that the Edelstein review is really that bad – he did offer it up as a Critics’ pick.
EW’s Owen Gleiberman gives the film a solid A and writes about Rourke:
That’s something Mickey Rourke must know a lot about. As a young star, he was a bow-lipped bad boy who wooed women on screen with his soft voice and twinkly, knowing smile. Now, it’s not just his look that has changed; he seems stunted — all muscle and scar tissue, a figure of damaged loss. Miraculously, though, the softness remains. In The Wrestler, Rourke is at once an authentic former wrestling superstar, a Here’s How They Look Now! tabloid curiosity, and — more than ever — a great actor. With platinum hair down to his back, he’s like some bloated, freakazoid Sammy Hagar, and he makes you feel every crunched bone and pained breath, the way that Randy subjects his body to punishment to remind himself he’s alive. Aronofsky plays off Rourke’s fallen-icon status by feasting on that spectacular, pulped wreck of a face. Yet from within that mountain of wounded flesh, Rourke gives Randy a deep, slow voice of disarming gentleness. Randy is the soul of decency encased in a monster’s physique, with a buried sadness that, pushed far enough, explodes into rage.
And Edelstein on Rourke:
This is a case where an actor makes the difference. Mickey Rourke was once among our most charismatic leading men: alert, wittily self-contained (he always seemed to be smiling at a private joke), with a high but seductive voice. Whatever the hell he did to himself, it worked for Sin City, in which the makeup for his monster-man avenger Marv brought out the freakish poetry in his distended physiognomy. In The Wrestler, his face has that poetry without the makeup. Rourke has long blond hair that makes him look like a battered lion, and his tight, swollen mask makes Randy’s struggle to bare his soul even more momentous. It’s dumb, it’s outlandish, but smashing other people’s heads and getting his own smashed back really does complete him.
No Response for "The Wrestler Gets Raves"
Beyond Mickey’s performance, the movie itself is very moving. I know it’s trailing some more obvious candidates for BP, but I like the Wrestler as a NGNG pick. If enough people see it and if it can get some word-of-mouth momentum, I think it has a chance.
I’m in total agreement, jms67. More than Slumdog even, I came out of The Wrestler thinking, “If they push this properly, this could be a solid sneak BP nominee.” Of course, they haven’t pushed it properly, perhaps BECAUSE of Slumdog, and I feel that’s a shame. If MDB could win the show, imagine how far the more touching story of The Wrestler could go if it was positioned properly? Sigh.
I am also in agreement and you’d get no argument from me. Of everything I’ve seen and loved this year this film has stuck with me, clung to me even — especially Rourke. I love the final shot. But everything about it is just so well done.
We have our lone Director spot.
I’m glad to keep hearing about Rourke’s performance and the movie. But his comeback performance I thought came in 2005. Can anyone deny he was the absolute best thing about Sin City? But then again, he could win an Oscar for this. Good for him.
Yes, qwiggles, I have a sinking feeling that the studio isn’t going to give this movie the visibility and positioning it needs. But it raises an interesting question: Does every movie today need a major “push” to get a BP nomination? (The emphasis is on “major,” because every Oscar hopeful needs something.) I would think there’s something to be said for the power of discovery, of finding a diamond in the rough and being a champion for an underdog. The odds are against it here, but sometimes the passion, the pride and the bullhorn of the champions trump the FYC ads, right? (If this is complete naivete, I hope someone finds it charming.)
When I saw this in Toronto, I left the theater with really very little to criticize. I wanted another scene with Rourke and Wood but it wasn’t really a flaw of the film. If anything maybe Tomei’s character needed just a little more development. But The Wrestler succeeds in what he sets out to do and Rourke gives one of those performances that you remember. I’m not sure I would nominate it for BP but it’s certainly a film I admire, more for its performances and script than for its direction.
Rightly or wrongly, Fox Searchlight does seem to determine its annual darling, and throw all its weight behind it for BP. Witness last year, when it had 3 smaller films to choose from: Once (88 on Metacritic), The Savages (85), and Juno (81). Once was pretty haphazardly snuck in cinemas in the summer, The Savages got the same treatment in the late autumn, and Juno got all the pre-release “the next Little Miss Sunshine” studio hype and focussed marketing. It was all too clear from the beginning which horse Fox Searchlight had chosen to back.
Once wound up with only a Best Song nomination (which almost didn’t happen due to a screwy interpretation of the rules), The Savages only got noms for Laura Linney and for Tamara Jenkins’ original screenplay, and Juno got the 4 major noms. So, jms67, one might say that it is hard for a film to overcome its studio’s lack of backing for BP.
I see the same thing happening this year re: Slumdog and The Wrestler. Fox Searchlight decided before anything was released that it would push the crowd-pleasing Slumdog for BP, and make less of an effort for The Wrestler, which comes out of the gate as a harder sell with audiences. Fox Searchlight has positioned Slumdog as “this year’s hip film”, and The Wrestler as the film that will get an acting nod for Rourke and maybe Tomei, but nothing more.
I will admit that, living in the Midwest, I haven’t seen either film yet, so I have no way of forming an opinion as to which is actually better, Slumdog or The Wrestler, and probably won’t be able to until at least January. But out here one can still watch the studio machine at work, and it is behind Slumdog. The question is, why can’t a studio make the same push with at least 2 films? Would it split the vote too much?
I saw this a week ago and cried at the end of this film. It was so incredible. I really would like to see this nominated for best picture.
37 reviews on rotten tomatoes and its still at 100%! All we need is the blessing from Ebert and this movie’s good to go!
It’s a really, really, really good movie. Rourke does give an amazing and unforgettable performance and the film itself is deeply moving. I still wouldn’t go so far as to call it a great film like I thought “Milk” was. And as great as Rourke was as “The Ram” I still think I would give the Oscar to Penn who really captured Harvey Milk to a tee. Of course this then opens up the debate of historical figure (Milk) vs. fictional hero (The Ram). It will be a very close race.
Leave a reply