More Daniel Day Lewis Trashing- Page 2

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:08pm

See blue--that's what I think is so interesting about Plainview-SPOLIER ALERT!!-he trades in lies so often, I wasn't sure if he was telling the truth about his son--especially since he only tells him once he sees the boy as a threat.

I also question whether or not he really believes the stranger to be his brother--is the diary he reads HIS or his "brother's"--I think it's his and he reads what he has written and is disgisted that he has allowed himself to feel emotion for another person, and the fact that the person is a liar only adds to the rage.

It's questions like these that made the film so memorable for me at least.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:23pm

"So, Dame, are you saying that anytime you are aware of a performance being great, it suddenly becomes a bad performance because it takes you out of the story? "

There are many great performances that do not take you away from the world created in the movie. This one did for me because he was so over the top.

You know.. in a weird way in this movie he reminded me of a Mandy Patinkin performance. You know what I mean?

And by the way.. this is just discussion.. I am in no way trying to take away from anyones enjoyment of the film or D.D. L.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:27pm

I hated "There Will Be Blood" and even more Day Lewis left me cold. Three hours of nothing, it was hard to feel anything for a single person in that film. I hope Day Lewis loses the oscar.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:29pm

I think I know what you mean DAME--during that last scene he was getting alot of laughs--but to my mind, it had much to do with "Daniel Day-Lewis, Great Actor" than the actual character--it didn't detract for me--but I think I know of what you speak--I felt the same about Streep in PRADA--yes, she was very funny, but alot of the humor came from watching MERYL STREEP dish out the insults.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:31pm

EXACTLY.. Except in the case of Prada.. thank god for Meryl Streep. Because there was nothing on that screen ( script, direction ) except for her.

[AnnaK<3LMIP]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:33pm

So it's like you're too distracted by the actor and WHO the actor is, so it takes away from the film? Because that I can totally understand.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:38pm

I think that happens--can you watch BABY JANE without thinking of the real life feud between the stars? REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE without thinking of all three stars' tragic deaths? The backstory of an actor or a film can often add emotional resonance or humor that it wouldn't otherwise have.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:44pm

" The backstory of an actor or a film can often add emotional resonance or humor that it wouldn't otherwise have."

Sure..at times. But I think in this "performance" it is just a case of bad "look at me" acting.

Updated On: 2/20/08 at 05:44 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:47pm

Hence we have diff'rent strokes....hmmmm

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:54pm

He got no recognition for his work in Gangs Of New York

I cannot imagine anyone else in the role in Blood.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:55pm

Are you sure you weren't reacting to the character Dame? Because it seems that everything you have against the performance can be traced back to issues you have with the character, which I think is something the film was trying to achieve.

[misschung]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 5:58pm

I agree with that.

I can't speak on There Will Be Blood, as I haven't seen it, but just watch "In the Name of the Father" and you'll see how good of an actor he really is.

Thank you.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:02pm

Nope. There is just something about him I find very mannered. I didn't believe a word that came out of his mouth.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:03pm

"He got no recognition for his work in Gangs Of New York "

Ummmm, he won the BAFTA, Broadcast Film Critics Award, multiple Film Critics Awards (incuding New York and Chicago), and the SAG.

He was also nominated for a Golden Globe and an Oscar.

In fact, as I remember it, he was the frontrunner for the Oscar.

So, he got lots of recognition for that performance.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:09pm

Wasn't Pia Zadora up for some of those awards too? And we all know what a great actress she is.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:12pm

By recognition, I meant the Oscars since they are being given out on Sunday. Sorry for not stating this initially.

DAME, Pia was in Santa Claus Conquers The Martians. A real classic.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:13pm

Well, it certainly amazes me that two intelligent people can watch the exact same performance/film and come away with such different perspectives and opinions. That is one of the things that makes humans so interesting and complex.

I found the film to be scorching, extremely relevant and continually entertaining. But that doesn't mean I can convince someone who hated it to see what I saw.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:14pm

Well, Mr Roxy, he actually DID receive recognition from the Oscars in the form of a nomination. That is a considerable achievement in itself.

[DAME]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:16pm

" But that doesn't mean I can convince someone who hated it to see what I saw."

I wish I did see what you saw. It would have made for a better time spent.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:16pm

My wife did not care for Old men. I liked it but liked Blood much more.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 6:51pm

I hated There Will Be Blood (bored out of my skull, honestly, and that's rare for me), but I still have to admire Daniel's acting. He's great, the film just didn't appeal to me in the slightest.

[roquat]

Posted: 2/20/08 at 11:51pm

AnnaK--you seem to think we've entered a new era where "style" is more important than "talent." I think there have been stars in every major era who were unequal combinations of the two--there are plenty of stars in Old Hollywood who had no range and no real substance, but who got by on style, looks, and a certain image (Lana Turner, Norma Shearer, Veronica Lake) and were washed up when they hit 40. There are surely contemporary equivalents. There were also actors who were acclaimed as great artists in their day whose work seems dated and laughable now (Joan Crawford, Paul Muni) and some whose work does not (Bette Davis). I don't think this is a new phenomenon.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/21/08 at 9:30am

"Never let them see you in public after you've turned thirty-five. You're finished if you do!"

NORMA SHEARER

I'm not going to broach the Muni-Crawford argument.

[mallardo]

Posted: 2/21/08 at 9:41am

I don't know about you but I was totally disgusted with his acceptance speech at the SAG Awards in which he "dedicated his award" to Heath Ledger - a man he admittedly never met - in a maudlin and self-serving tribute, in order to promote himself as a caring and sensitive fellow. It was cashing in on tragedy in its rawest and most despicable form.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 2/21/08 at 9:58am

I just find it interesting that actors can get raves in a film that no one likes. Among my friends not one has liked "There Will Be Blood". They all found it a mind numbing boring experience, but they all said DDL was excellent. Even many critics say the film is too long and a bit tedious, but single out DDL. That never ceases to amaze me.