|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 1, 2007 16:26:01 GMT
I had the opportunity to see Amazing Grace last night at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival.
Rufus was... pretty brilliant, actually. It's a small role for him but he really shines against a very tough cast of grizzled British character actors.
The picture also has one of the best performances that I have ever seen from Albert Finney. Toby Jones was his usual delightful self. And Apted only gives fleeting acknowledgement to the religious aspect of the characters.
More later...
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Feb 1, 2007 16:51:43 GMT
Rufus was... pretty brilliant, actually. It's a small role for him but he really shines against a very tough cast of grizzled British character actors. I am as pleased as Punch to hear that! Yippee!!  |
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 1, 2007 23:57:32 GMT
My overall impression of the picture was favorable due almost wholly to the incredible supporting cast. There were some very respected actors in some terribly tiny roles which I imagine is a testament to Michael Apted's reputation. Either that or there is very little work out there for British character actors. Which of course we all know is not true. I can't even count the number of things in which I've seen Michael Gambon in the last year. I have never been an Ioan Gruffudd fan and I'm afraid this picture has done very little to change my opinion. Fortunately Benedict Cumberbatch as William Pitt shares many of his scenes and the balance are typically inhabited by one of the other fine supporting cast. And while I don't quite see what Rufus sees in Benedict Cumberbatch (I think Rufus was much better at the same age) I find him an interesting young actor worth keeping an eye on. This is another picture that I think suffered for the choice of the lead actor but I understand quite clearly why for example it would never be a role that Rufus would covet even if he were considered for it. I had several issues with the screenplay which shoveled up exposition like oatmeal with characters walking around and relating things that might have been better served on screen. I also found the cinematography and atmosphere more in line with a high-end production from the BBC rather than a theatrical release. I found the pacing repetitious as the principles tried over and over to abolish slavery without success. I missed the tension of the build up to a climax where they would finally succeed and the non-linear story-telling only exacerbated the issue. For folks who were looking forward to the Christian aspect of this story it's mentioned only in passing, a  to the fact but not taking up the banner in any sort of way. But enough about everyone else--- on to Rufus one of the genuine bright spots in more than skill and talent... |
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 2, 2007 0:34:13 GMT
I read in a blog one day last week that Rufus served up the role of Thomas Clarkson with wit and grace. I think that sums it up much better than I am able. The role is a small one but fully realized as we've come to expect from him. He creates a portrait of a gentle man coloured with eccentricities who has a cause and wants to be a partner to a better world. One of his very first scenes is a dinner party--the scene with the shackles-- the compassion on Clackson's face while he makes his plea is heartrending. It's Rufus at his best (as much of this film is) emotionally raw and allowing us a stolen peek into the horrors in his soul. There is a lovely scene a bit later on in which Wilberforce is taking the measure of a coffin because, as he tells us that is the size of the berth allowed the slaves as they are brought from Africa. It's another one of my favorite type of Rufus scenes with the genuine surprise and delight at his surprise and sorrow at what his friend is doing all mingle across his features to express more clearly than any words what he's feeling. One last scene (there are quite a few others but if I describe them all it will take away the fun of discovery) Clarkson strolls through a late summer field carrying a baby in his arms. He's reciting a poem for the child who is barely old enough to hold his head up. He tells the child he has no idea what it means but he was made to memorize it and the child will likely do so as well. The interaction with the child is lovely and whimsical, tender and sweet, and deeply protective. It's a glorious scene that tells us more about the man Clarkson than anything written in the script or dialog. As he smiles at the child, he's interrupted by Wilberforce who comes over the hill and tells him he is needed back in London. "Bollocks" He mutters under his breath and begins the trudge back home-a mixture of regret and anticipation written across his features. This scene could be no longer than 90 seconds and it's so full it's breath-taking. Magical. Every time I think he can't possibly do better he does. He's a very high bright point in this often depressing unfulfilled picture. oh yes, and one more thing that must have pleased him beyond measure: he spends most of the picture looking like the south end of a north-bound mule.  |
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 2, 2007 0:56:20 GMT
Ah! I forgot,  Fellow Highlander chicklets, Richard Ridings who played the horseman Silas is in this picture. I didn't recognize his name or his face (you'll understand why when you see him) but you can't miss his voice. |
|
|
|
Post by mcr5137 on Feb 3, 2007 18:29:43 GMT
Woohoo! Maxx, thank you for all your posts about this film! You have made me want to see it more than I already did AND you have given me things to really look for as I watch! And I will have all the things you've said in my head during certain scenes, so I know I will get far more out of it on my first viewing than I would have originally! So, again, THANK YOU!
Silas, huh? Now I'm hoping I can figure out who he is in this film!!!! The Four Horsemen ep is one of my most favorite eps of Highlander!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by quoll on Feb 3, 2007 20:15:23 GMT
The mother of the baby enquired on the AG board on IMDB whether the scene with Rufus and her son had made the cut - sounds like it is one scene not to be missed!
Still no indication of when (or, indeed, if!) this is ever going to be shown in Aus.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 3, 2007 22:56:56 GMT
I'm a bit biased of course but I thought most of Rufus' scenes were not to be missed. I came away understanding so much about his character and what kind of man he was that when I think back to the brief time he was actually on camera it startles me. There was something about his portrayal of Clarkson that was daffiy eccentric but I can't tell you why I believe that--can't point to any one thing... As I'm thinking of it, I think his performance had elements of Ross. Perhaps it was the same stubborn refusal to give up and I can't tell you why but I had the most insistent and nagging desire to hug him. But there were also elements of Charles... HA! I've discovered his trick. He creates complex and textured characters by layering all of his roles, one over the other. I can tell you one thing, I'm not going to go reading about Thomas Clarkson because I'll bet he was nearly as charming as Rufus portrayed him.  MCR you'll know exactly who he is when he speaks. You can't miss him but he's wearing makeup and a powdered wig and he looks like a cherubic child--not exactly the horror Slaughter of the 4 horseman. |
|
|
|
Post by mcr5137 on Feb 4, 2007 1:40:54 GMT
Well Silas was the only "big guy" of the horseman! Caspian, Methos and Kronos are all much thinner! So maybe I'll figure out who he is! Peter Wingfield and Adrian Paul both said he was just a big teddy bear!
I like what you said about Rufus layering his roles..........sounds perfect!
Michelle
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Feb 8, 2007 1:48:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tinkerdog on Feb 8, 2007 13:52:46 GMT
I waited to see Holiday but I really want to see this one. I believe it is to be released on February 23rd. That is the second day of our annual convention. My plan is to spend the day with thousands of dentists and the profession and my night with Rufus. Usually our relief comes after the meeting - I'll get mine on Friday night!
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Feb 14, 2007 5:56:00 GMT
I saw AG tonight and it was an altogether great experience. I went with a friend who knew I was a little more than just simply interested in seeing this movie so he came prepared. He didn't enjoy it as much as I did and when at one point I leaned over to ask him if he knew who Michael Gambon was supposed to portray, he simply replied 'some dude' which made me laugh. I liked the film but didn't love it. It's a costume drama and a pretty typical one at that. Ioan Gruffudd was fine, I liked Benedict and the other supporting cast was fab. I'm not sure whether I love Rufie's performance (as in 'omg the best thing since sliced bread'; I did really like it) , I think it has to sink in. It struck me as 'angry young man' for the most part and only later in the film does he become likeable. His final moments in the film made me melt though. Let me sleep and ponder on Clarkson. As to his appearance, oh my god, he looks like an aging hippy at a Renaissance Fair!!  Plus his head appeared bigger than most of the other heads so he stood out quite a bit. But that's ok, I still lurve him. After the film there was a Q&A with Michael Apted and Ioan Gruffudd. Apted did most of the talking, Gruffudd looked around a lot. I hate it when at a Q&A some people get ignored, it's totally rude. Gruffudd did think he was a good singer which I can't say I agree with based on his rendition of "Amazing Grace" in the film. Poor Ioan although I'm sure he'll survive. Oh and at the credits when the actors' photos came up with their name, some of them got an applause. Albert Finney was a favourite of the crowd. So when Rufus appeared I totally cheered and clapped and there you go, a few people joined me and went 'yeah!'. Represent! ETA: After the Q&A I went up to Michael Apted and told him how much I enjoyed the film and said how clever it was to cast Rufus Sewell as a good guy. He said "Thank you. He really gave a lot to it". That was cute. Transparent... who, me?  |
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 14, 2007 14:22:29 GMT
I liked the film but didn't love it. It's a costume drama and a pretty typical one at that. pretty much my take on it as well. that's really interesting. I didn't get that at all but sometimes I miss things like that because I'm so transfixed by all of the little things going on with him. Can't see the big picture because I'm so focused on the nuance. I thought his character was fascinatingly eccentric--not your typical idea of a minister--at least in the 21st century. I though he was peculiarly optimistic considering the wailing going on around him which was one of my biggest problems with the picture. Well that and the screenplay... lol! I kept thinking, he's gonna love this if he hasn't seen it already. He looks appalling. No will come away from this picture talking about how pretty he is. That actually happened at the screening I went to as well, though in LA people often clap at the end of films <shrug>. But oddly some of the loudest applause was for Rufus. But it was a film festival and there were many industry types in attendance so they logically would know who Rufus is. Apted and Gruffudd and Cumberbatch were at the screening I attended as well. I didn't talk to them. I wouldn't have had much to say but to congratulate Apted for casting Rufus. Neither of the actors stirred me to seek them out. |
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Feb 14, 2007 15:40:01 GMT
Neither of the actors stirred me to seek them out. I don't know about your screening but Ioan looked so LA at mine. All tanned and wearing this preposterous printed shirt/leather jacket combo. He did appear sweet and soft-spoken though. I'll have to study Roof's performance when I go see it again when it opens. I do think there were traces of Charlie II and even some Jan in there. Obviously because mannerisms are more likely to be Roof's own than thought up for the character. A pensive look is a pensive look. I guess it's because I've seen almost his whole (film/tv) oeuvre and most of it multiple times so obviously I'm familiar with his mannerisms. However, the fact that I have means that I approve! And actually, somewhere towards the end there is a close-up of him that lingers a couple of seconds (could it be the end of the baby scene??) and there was something there that honestly I hadn't seen before. I guess what I'm trying to say is ... yeah I don't know. I'll need to think about it. |
|
|
|
Post by maxx02 on Feb 14, 2007 16:33:01 GMT
I don't know about your screening but Ioan looked so LA at mine. All tanned and wearing this preposterous printed shirt/leather jacket combo. He did appear sweet and soft-spoken though. yup. must be his 'touring' suit. Ah did I see something new? hum, probably not. Just something more complex than the Illusionist which is the last picture I saw him in. I don't know if we're ever going to see anything new until he breaks this mold of the type of films he seems to constantly be cast in. It's odd but I see a lot less competent actors being given really plum roles that Rufus would be excellent for and would be something outside his normal venue. But Rufus is so resolute on his approach to his career who knows what he might have passed up. For example I started to watch Dirty Filthy Love the other day and for a myriad of reasons including Shirley Henderson and the fact that Michael Sheen is up against Roof this weekend I started wondering what Mike would have been like with Rufus in the roll and as usual I thought we'd know a lot more about what was torturing Mike if Roof did this. And as usual I thought he would have been a much better choice. But Michael Sheen is a work horse. He does what comes to him which I think opens up a lot of opportunities for an actor because people get to think of them in different ways. I doubt you would have ever seen Roof in the Underworld films even if he was starving. And I can't imagine Roof ever doing a role where he mimicked a famous person, but these things make people see Michael Sheen in a different way. You know I have to agree that I think his face has been holding him back. And that's odd too because in real life I don't find him nearly as pretty as he appears on screen. The camera worships and adores him. I mean even these latests pictures are just doting. Don't misunderstand, he's a very handsome man but no one I would probably look twice at on the street. On camera, he's all most too pretty to bear. And I think that works against him because people refuse to look at him as anything other than a leading man unless they are doing some huge budget monstrosity where they can make him up to look like something else and cast him as the stock villain. Roof seems to be in a nice kind gentle phase right now where every role encompasses this sort of kooky charm. When I say this, I'm also thinking of Rock 'n' Roll because Jan is a very gentle man, kind and soft spoken. And I think he's going to be in great danger of getting type cast into that role if he isn't careful. I said once before that every role seems to be a backlash to the one before it and because he likes comedy and seems to want to do it, that seems to be the side he's showing--in everything.... ah well, he has a long career ahead of him and for an actor he's just really getting into the meat of it. It will be interesting to see what he pulls out going forward. I'd be fascinated to see him just do himself for once--approach a role without slipping on an elaborate character. Just Rufus playing an everyman in some unusual circumstance. I think everyone quite liked TOTS and I think everyone who has met him will agree with him that character 'feels' most like his real life persona. and oh yes, I will see this again next weekend as well. And I may have a different take on it then too. |
|
Plus his head appeared bigger than most of the other heads so he stood out quite a bit. But that's ok, I still lurve him.