Not a whole lot to talk about this month. Cynthia Nixon was robbed, the novel rewrite is going great, and things between me and Virginia are swell. The Neil Simon Blogathon is in a couple of weeks; there's still time to join Paddy and myself for the occasion, if you want in.
Let's jump straight to the links for once!
Raquel answers questions from her readers.
Ivan discusses the century-old comic strip Gasoline Alley and the two films inspired by it.
Jacqueline ponders whether this Depression-era film endorsed socialism.
Jennifer talks contemporary high school movies and compares them with her own experience.
Le writes about a very early Ernst Lubitsch silent film which challenges gender roles.
Variety's coverage of Cynthia Nixon's loss in the New York primaries.
What are Feedspot's choices for the Top 30 Classic Film Blogs?
The Wizard of Oz ruby slippers, after having gone missing for 13 years, have been found!
Gauging the truthiness of films "based on a true story."
Bullwinkle and political satire.
Is it possible liking trash cinema makes you smarter?
Claudette Colbert liked cooking desserts.
Armie Hammer hearts scooters.
Finally, best wishes to Crystal of In the Good Old Days of Classic Hollywood, who's recovering from surgery.
Showing posts with label fashion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fashion. Show all posts
Monday, October 1, 2018
Monday, October 2, 2017
Link runner
I'm sure I've talked about this before, but I was reminded of it again recently and I feel like complaining. As you know, I come from a comics background. Marvel and DC Comics have broken into television and film in a big way now, to the point where secondary and tertiary characters, the ones only hardcore comics fans would have known in the past, are getting their moments in the spotlight.
If you still actually read the comics themselves, I imagine it's pretty exciting, though my passion for superhero comics cooled long ago. If you're a fan of a certain age, like I am, you can remember when they were - not a secret thing, exactly, but something that required specialized knowledge to fully comprehend, and only a minority possessed it. Having that knowledge made us unique and distinctive, if not exactly popular, but that was the price we paid for knowing important things like Wonder Girl's convoluted history or the fate of Cyclops' second brother.
It's more than a little grating to me to know the walls of the fortress called Comics Fandom have been breached; that anybody with a Netflix account can get a basic education on the fringe elements of the Marvel Universe, the kinda stuff that used to be the exclusive province of the fanboy. Even ten years ago, TV shows based on characters like Luke Cage and Iron Fist and now the Inhumans would have been nothing more than fodder for a Wizard magazine "Casting Call" column. It's just a struggle to accept (though I wonder how many people who watch these shows and films read the comics on which they were based).
Speaking of TV, between Discovery, The Orville and Feud, I've watched way more of it this year than usual, and um, how do I say this without sounding like a prude... It's surprising what you can say and do on TV now. You're all saying "No duh," but it's one thing to write about how shows look more like movies now and another to actually see it for myself. I mean, they were bandying the word dick around pretty casually on The Orville (it's a Fox show, so I really shouldn't have been surprised).
Feud was on basic cable, but even so, I couldn't quite get used to the profanity - which is odd, because if I were watching a movie on IFC or Cinemax that had profanity, I wouldn't think twice. Maybe it's because I know it's a movie that makes the difference?
It's not just the language. The production values on Feud, as I said at the time, were outstanding: sets, wardrobe, cinematography and editing. The aliens and ships in Discovery and Orville, not to mention the visual effects, make every episode look theatrical. It's no wonder film is suffering another downturn in sales. I guess that's why some theaters are so eager to install luxury recliner seats and have a wait staff bring you your food. What's next?
In other news, my novel is close to done. When it comes time to revise it, I'll have to do things like fill in research gaps, such as for medical and legal story details; rethink certain character traits now that I know more about them; rethink certain plot details; and rewrite where necessary... and it will be necessary. In a lot of ways, it's a bigger task than writing the story. This was a good idea, right?
Two blogathon posts for you this month, and now that fall is here, the good new releases will multiply. I may even write about a few.
Your links:
Ivan checks out an early film from dance legend Bill "Bojangles" Robinson.
Marsha explains why Marilyn Monroe made her cry.
Aurora has a terrific guest post from a woman who grew up a classic film fan in Spain.
Silver Screenings Ruth peeps behind the curtain at movie stars before they were glamorous.
Le looks at the friendship of Myrna Loy and Jean Harlow.
The reaction to Mother! is the latest example of the need for audiences to have everything explained to them. (Excellent article.)
One of my favorite childhood TV series, The Carol Burnett Show, debuted 50 years ago last month.
John Lennon once appeared in a fourth wall-breaking war comedy.
Ever wonder how theaters started selling popcorn?
Wanna buy some of Audrey Hepburn's old clothes?
If you still actually read the comics themselves, I imagine it's pretty exciting, though my passion for superhero comics cooled long ago. If you're a fan of a certain age, like I am, you can remember when they were - not a secret thing, exactly, but something that required specialized knowledge to fully comprehend, and only a minority possessed it. Having that knowledge made us unique and distinctive, if not exactly popular, but that was the price we paid for knowing important things like Wonder Girl's convoluted history or the fate of Cyclops' second brother.
It's more than a little grating to me to know the walls of the fortress called Comics Fandom have been breached; that anybody with a Netflix account can get a basic education on the fringe elements of the Marvel Universe, the kinda stuff that used to be the exclusive province of the fanboy. Even ten years ago, TV shows based on characters like Luke Cage and Iron Fist and now the Inhumans would have been nothing more than fodder for a Wizard magazine "Casting Call" column. It's just a struggle to accept (though I wonder how many people who watch these shows and films read the comics on which they were based).
Speaking of TV, between Discovery, The Orville and Feud, I've watched way more of it this year than usual, and um, how do I say this without sounding like a prude... It's surprising what you can say and do on TV now. You're all saying "No duh," but it's one thing to write about how shows look more like movies now and another to actually see it for myself. I mean, they were bandying the word dick around pretty casually on The Orville (it's a Fox show, so I really shouldn't have been surprised).
Feud was on basic cable, but even so, I couldn't quite get used to the profanity - which is odd, because if I were watching a movie on IFC or Cinemax that had profanity, I wouldn't think twice. Maybe it's because I know it's a movie that makes the difference?
It's not just the language. The production values on Feud, as I said at the time, were outstanding: sets, wardrobe, cinematography and editing. The aliens and ships in Discovery and Orville, not to mention the visual effects, make every episode look theatrical. It's no wonder film is suffering another downturn in sales. I guess that's why some theaters are so eager to install luxury recliner seats and have a wait staff bring you your food. What's next?
In other news, my novel is close to done. When it comes time to revise it, I'll have to do things like fill in research gaps, such as for medical and legal story details; rethink certain character traits now that I know more about them; rethink certain plot details; and rewrite where necessary... and it will be necessary. In a lot of ways, it's a bigger task than writing the story. This was a good idea, right?
Two blogathon posts for you this month, and now that fall is here, the good new releases will multiply. I may even write about a few.
Your links:
Ivan checks out an early film from dance legend Bill "Bojangles" Robinson.
Marsha explains why Marilyn Monroe made her cry.
Aurora has a terrific guest post from a woman who grew up a classic film fan in Spain.
Silver Screenings Ruth peeps behind the curtain at movie stars before they were glamorous.
Le looks at the friendship of Myrna Loy and Jean Harlow.
The reaction to Mother! is the latest example of the need for audiences to have everything explained to them. (Excellent article.)
One of my favorite childhood TV series, The Carol Burnett Show, debuted 50 years ago last month.
John Lennon once appeared in a fourth wall-breaking war comedy.
Ever wonder how theaters started selling popcorn?
Wanna buy some of Audrey Hepburn's old clothes?
Monday, September 19, 2016
William Ware Theiss
I'm very grateful that the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies have not (so far) made dramatic changes to the Starfleet uniforms. It has always bugged me, the number of times the uniforms have altered over the years, as if the quartermaster's office at Starfleet Command could never make their minds up as to what defines haute couture fashion out on the final frontier.
The TOS designs are simple and have translated well to the big screen. Of course, we've also been provided with a bunch of variations: dress wear, rugged terrain wear, etc. Still, they have always returned to the basic look in the end - the one established by William Ware Theiss.
Yes, it's because of Theiss that you got to see Nichelle Nichols' legs every week! As the TOS costumer, Theiss had his (non-union) seamstresses operate out of a secret apartment near the studio where they toiled throughout the night to make the clothes. It goes without saying that he had a mandate from Gene Roddenberry to make all the women as sexy as possible, especially the guest stars.
Did you know Theiss was a three-time Oscar nominee? He worked on, among other films, Harold and Maude and Bound for Glory, plus uncredited work on Spartacus. He would go on to win an Emmy in 1988 for Outstanding Costume Design for a Series for - you guessed it - TNG.
The 25 most out-of-this-world TOS costumes
-----------------
Previously:
DC Fontana
Gene Coon
Matt Jefferies
The TOS designs are simple and have translated well to the big screen. Of course, we've also been provided with a bunch of variations: dress wear, rugged terrain wear, etc. Still, they have always returned to the basic look in the end - the one established by William Ware Theiss.
Yes, it's because of Theiss that you got to see Nichelle Nichols' legs every week! As the TOS costumer, Theiss had his (non-union) seamstresses operate out of a secret apartment near the studio where they toiled throughout the night to make the clothes. It goes without saying that he had a mandate from Gene Roddenberry to make all the women as sexy as possible, especially the guest stars.
Did you know Theiss was a three-time Oscar nominee? He worked on, among other films, Harold and Maude and Bound for Glory, plus uncredited work on Spartacus. He would go on to win an Emmy in 1988 for Outstanding Costume Design for a Series for - you guessed it - TNG.
The 25 most out-of-this-world TOS costumes
-----------------
Previously:
DC Fontana
Gene Coon
Matt Jefferies
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Edith Head
In the coming-up-on-five years I've written this blog, I've rarely, if ever, talked about fashion in movies, so what better way to do so than to talk about the industry's most iconic fashion designer, winner of eight Academy Awards and the woman responsible for making some of the most beautiful men and women in Hollywood even more so?
When it comes to a fabulous dress in a movie, I mean one that will be remembered in fifty years or more, my experience is that most of the time, you just know it when you see it: that big poofy number Deborah Kerr wore when she danced with Yul Brynner in The King and I. Those slinky, matching red outfits Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell wore in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Rita Hayworth's strapless body-hugger in Gilda. One could argue that it's not so much the dress as it is the woman who wears it, but I say it's a little bit of both. As for the fellas, I'll be honest, the only time I really notice what a dude's wearing in a movie is in a period piece - or maybe a genre movie! Hollywood has always been about selling glamour, and clothes were a major part of that.
Head achieved the fame she did as a costume designer despite having lied about her abilities. She learned art primarily through night school classes and claimed someone else's sketches for her own when she applied for a costume sketch artist job at Paramount in 1924. It worked, though, and by 1938 she was top dog at the studio's costume department, the first woman to hold such a position at a major studio. While she was occasionally loaned out to other studios, Paramount was her home for over forty years.
So what made her so in-demand? Let's look at five examples of her work (click on the names to see the costumes):
![]() |
Note the sketch for Bette Davis' All About Eve dress on the right. |
- Audrey Hepburn in Roman Holiday. Wardrobe was also a key factor in Audrey's Oscar-winning breakthrough role, both as a princess and as a regular woman. Here's Head on the TV show You Asked For It talking about her experience with Hepburn on that movie:
- Grace Kelly in To Catch a Thief. And speaking of princesses... There's no shortage of fabulous outfits that Kelly wore in this one, but I've chosen to highlight the blue gown she wears when she meets Cary Grant for the first time. (Grant chose his own outfits.) I like the way that sheer sash-type thing covers one side of her upper body.
The movie was released in 1955, but it's set less than a decade earlier, and Kelly's blue dress was inspired by Christian Dior, whose post-war "New Look" was a game-changer in women's fashions. Head enjoyed her time with Kelly to the point where she called Kelly her favorite actress to work with. Head worked with director Alfred Hitchcock on a number of other films, including Rear Window, The Man Who Knew Too Much and Vertigo.
- Wayne & Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Head was no stranger to Westerns (Shane, Hatari! and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, among many others), and in this one, while fashion isn't necessarily a highlight, John Wayne and Jimmy Stewart both come across looking quite well. Duke's cowboy gear is pretty spiffy, what with this bib shirt and neckerchief, and he gets to dress up formally too. Jimbo, meanwhile, gets attired in some crisp and natty suits that are appropriate for his long, tall frame.
- Redford & Newman in The Sting. This film, on the other hand, was all about style, and the outfits for Robert Redford and Paul Newman were the jewel in the crown. Head worked with Peter Saldutti, Andrea Weaver and Vincent Dee, though Head's role was more of a supervisory one. While there's no truth to the story that Redford & Newman both wanted to wear blue shirts to match their eyes, what they do wear - fedoras, pinstripes, suspenders, berets, etc. - help evoke the atmosphere of Depression-era Chicago, and they wear it all very well, during a period in time when they were both immensely popular. Head's Oscar win here was her eighth. She neglected to thank her co-designers, though, and she took out an ad in the Costume Designers Guild newsletter later to rectify that.
As more information is unearthed about the Golden Age of Hollywood, what is fact and what is fiction is becoming better known, and even if the legend of Edith Head may not have been entirely earned, hers is the name people remember.
Next: Joel McCrea
----------------------
Films credited to Edith Head:
Remember the Night
The Lady Eve
Here Comes Mr. Jordan
Sullivan's Travels
Double Indemnity
Sorry Wrong Number
The Heiress
Sunset Boulevard
A Place in the Sun
Road to Bali
Previously:
Jack Lemmon
Jean Arthur
Edward G. Robinson
Rita Moreno
Frank Capra
Bernard Herrmann
Joan Blondell
James Dean
Ethel Waters
William Powell
Tod Browning
Friday, May 16, 2014
Belle
Belle
seen @ Kew Gardens Cinemas, Kew Gardens, Queens NY
5.13.14
It's those dresses. They're... distracting. Whenever I watch a period piece set in the 19th century or earlier, I just can't help but be distracted by them. Yes, I realize that it's the corsets underneath them that create all that generous cleavage, and yes, they're probably uncomfortable as hell, but... usually, they're the only thing that keeps me awake whenever I watch a period piece. Most of the time, all those movies about Lady Such-and-Such and her secret burning passion for Sir So-and-So as they wander around their English mansions with their butlers and maids and tea bore me to death. Though there are exceptions, of course.
I wish I could say Belle was one of them. It's unfortunate that this came out so soon after the superior 12 Years a Slave. Comparisons have no doubt been drawn, even though the two films are quite different, and while I could tell from the trailer that Belle would be much more glamorous and Hollywoodized than the Best Picture Oscar winner, I still felt obligated to give it a look at least - unless it turned out to be irredeemably bad.
It was not irredeemably bad. But even if it did not suffer from living in the long shadow of 12 Years, I still wouldn't think much of it beyond its earnest effort to shine a light on the history of the slave trade - and "earnest" is definitely the word to describe Belle. It wants you to respect and love it, whereas 12 Years couldn't give a damn what you think of it.
You can figure out the plot from the trailer: 18th century English white man fathers a biracial girl from a black slave; she's raised in a white family of prestige but is never truly one of them; falls in love with a white man and must fight for her right toparty be treated equally. Plus some real world stuff. This whole movie, in fact, is based on a true story. (Everyone calls her Dido but the movie is called Belle. Did the filmmakers assume people would think of the singer instead?)
The first half is exactly what you'd expect - Belle as tragic mulatta, right down to the scene where our Halfrican heroine pulls and picks and tears at her cafe au lait-colored skin, ashamed of all the trouble it's brought her. I don't mean to sound cynical about it all, especially since this is directed by a sister, but this is all familiar territory. It's Imitation of Life and Pinky in fancy dress. Still, I suppose it is necessary to set up the other side of the story, regarding a slave ship lost at sea and whether or not the crew threw its slaves overboard as a cost-cutting measure - a case that Belle's adopted father must judge. It's a fascinating bit of history, but it's supplementary to our heroine's tale, and the outcome is never in doubt.
When I wrote about 12 Years, I said that that I was worried that Hollywood would continue to mine black history at the expense of modern black stories. I'm glad that a black woman director, Amma Asante, got the opportunity to make this, and that a young new actress, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, got to star in it, and I hope they both get more opportunities in the future, but seriously - it's past time for some more modern black movies. Belle pretty much does what it's supposed to do and no more, and while it's totally not fair to compare it to 12 Years, that movie will set the standard for how slave trade stories are told from now on. Belle is decent, but it's nowhere near in that league.
Had a bit of a surprise at the Kew Gardens: Actual Black People were in the audience for this movie. I know this because I heard them providing the audio commentary. (That and I saw them in the lobby afterwards.) It was at least two middle-aged women, sitting on the far side of the auditorium and several rows up from me, and every so often they felt the need to audibly react to certain dramatic moments in the movie. I was tempted to throw something at them but I wasn't sure if I'd hit them or not and I'd have hated to have targeted the wrong person.
On the one hand, I love the fact that Actual Black People came to see Belle! It's not playing at the Jamaica Multiplex, a theater in an actual black neighborhood, and I've talked before about how I think such theaters should support movies like these as well as the Tyler Perry ones. Still, I don't know if these women went out of their way to see Belle (Kew Gardens is a Jewish neighborhood). That said, is it asking so much to not live up to the stereotype for a movie like this? This is not The Queen Latifah Show, and you're not watching it in your living room.
seen @ Kew Gardens Cinemas, Kew Gardens, Queens NY
5.13.14
It's those dresses. They're... distracting. Whenever I watch a period piece set in the 19th century or earlier, I just can't help but be distracted by them. Yes, I realize that it's the corsets underneath them that create all that generous cleavage, and yes, they're probably uncomfortable as hell, but... usually, they're the only thing that keeps me awake whenever I watch a period piece. Most of the time, all those movies about Lady Such-and-Such and her secret burning passion for Sir So-and-So as they wander around their English mansions with their butlers and maids and tea bore me to death. Though there are exceptions, of course.
I wish I could say Belle was one of them. It's unfortunate that this came out so soon after the superior 12 Years a Slave. Comparisons have no doubt been drawn, even though the two films are quite different, and while I could tell from the trailer that Belle would be much more glamorous and Hollywoodized than the Best Picture Oscar winner, I still felt obligated to give it a look at least - unless it turned out to be irredeemably bad.
It was not irredeemably bad. But even if it did not suffer from living in the long shadow of 12 Years, I still wouldn't think much of it beyond its earnest effort to shine a light on the history of the slave trade - and "earnest" is definitely the word to describe Belle. It wants you to respect and love it, whereas 12 Years couldn't give a damn what you think of it.
You can figure out the plot from the trailer: 18th century English white man fathers a biracial girl from a black slave; she's raised in a white family of prestige but is never truly one of them; falls in love with a white man and must fight for her right to
The first half is exactly what you'd expect - Belle as tragic mulatta, right down to the scene where our Halfrican heroine pulls and picks and tears at her cafe au lait-colored skin, ashamed of all the trouble it's brought her. I don't mean to sound cynical about it all, especially since this is directed by a sister, but this is all familiar territory. It's Imitation of Life and Pinky in fancy dress. Still, I suppose it is necessary to set up the other side of the story, regarding a slave ship lost at sea and whether or not the crew threw its slaves overboard as a cost-cutting measure - a case that Belle's adopted father must judge. It's a fascinating bit of history, but it's supplementary to our heroine's tale, and the outcome is never in doubt.
When I wrote about 12 Years, I said that that I was worried that Hollywood would continue to mine black history at the expense of modern black stories. I'm glad that a black woman director, Amma Asante, got the opportunity to make this, and that a young new actress, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, got to star in it, and I hope they both get more opportunities in the future, but seriously - it's past time for some more modern black movies. Belle pretty much does what it's supposed to do and no more, and while it's totally not fair to compare it to 12 Years, that movie will set the standard for how slave trade stories are told from now on. Belle is decent, but it's nowhere near in that league.
Had a bit of a surprise at the Kew Gardens: Actual Black People were in the audience for this movie. I know this because I heard them providing the audio commentary. (That and I saw them in the lobby afterwards.) It was at least two middle-aged women, sitting on the far side of the auditorium and several rows up from me, and every so often they felt the need to audibly react to certain dramatic moments in the movie. I was tempted to throw something at them but I wasn't sure if I'd hit them or not and I'd have hated to have targeted the wrong person.
On the one hand, I love the fact that Actual Black People came to see Belle! It's not playing at the Jamaica Multiplex, a theater in an actual black neighborhood, and I've talked before about how I think such theaters should support movies like these as well as the Tyler Perry ones. Still, I don't know if these women went out of their way to see Belle (Kew Gardens is a Jewish neighborhood). That said, is it asking so much to not live up to the stereotype for a movie like this? This is not The Queen Latifah Show, and you're not watching it in your living room.
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Urbanworld FF: Won't Back Down
The Urbanworld Film Festival is a showcase for filmmakers and actors of color, presented at the AMC 34th Street in New York City. For more information on the festival and to see the full 2012 schedule of films, visit the website.
Appropos of nothing: I remember how surprised I was earlier this year at the Oscars, seeing Viola Davis appear baring her natural afro. Surprised a lot of people too. Whether or not actors in general and black actresses in particular wear wigs is not something most people tend to think about - I never did - but from now on, whenever I see her in a movie, I probably will... and to be honest, I kinda wish she were able to go au natural more often. But that's a discussion for another time.
If it weren't for Urbanworld, I probably would've passed on seeing Won't Back Down (of course they use the Tom Petty song in the closing credits). I saw the trailer prior to this week, and to me it looked like one more inspirational "true" story that Hollywood loves to make every so often. The depressingly generic and unimaginative title certainly didn't help.
I didn't doubt the film's quality, but the trailer made it perfectly clear what kind of movie this was gonna be, as well as how it would end. Maybe Gene Siskel was right about not watching trailers.
Anyway, it turned out to be exactly as I expected, but I gotta admit, I was entertained by it, and that was due to the outstanding work of the film's stars, Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal. The latter plays a single Pittsburgh mom with a dyslexic daughter, trying to find a better school for her than the one's she's in, until she learns about a way to organize parents and teachers together into forging a better school system, even though it means defying the powerful teachers' union. Davis plays the first teacher Gyllenhaal recruits for the cause, one with a learning disabled child of her own, as well as a terrible secret.
It's absolutely an important story. Won't Back Down goes into how the Pittsburgh school program proved inadequate to the cause of helping children like those of Gyllenhaal and Davis, through negligence or bureaucracy or both, and how the union is a vital force for providing security for its members. There are no villains in this story, just opposing points of view, and I appreciate that director Daniel Barnz went to such lengths to make this clear.
Still, the film does follow all the familiar Hollywood beats - romantic subplot, darkest hour, rally from an unexpected source, final confrontation - and the outcome is never in any real doubt. It's a formula that doesn't provide much in the way of surprises.
That said, however, Gyllenhaal and Davis make it watchable. I never really gave Gyllenhaal much thought beyond being Jake's sister, but she was powerful in a great role that let her shine. As for Davis, she had me from the start, but she also has a crucial late scene with her son that sold me on the entire film. She didn't oversell it - god knows she could have - but it was one more reminder of why her work is so admired by her peers. (If only it was admired enough to have given her that Oscar...)
------------------
Previously:
Being Mary Jane
Dar He: The Lynching of Emmett Till
![]() |
Co-stars Rosie Perez & Lance Reddick |
If it weren't for Urbanworld, I probably would've passed on seeing Won't Back Down (of course they use the Tom Petty song in the closing credits). I saw the trailer prior to this week, and to me it looked like one more inspirational "true" story that Hollywood loves to make every so often. The depressingly generic and unimaginative title certainly didn't help.
![]() |
Lance Reddick, with his wife |
Anyway, it turned out to be exactly as I expected, but I gotta admit, I was entertained by it, and that was due to the outstanding work of the film's stars, Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal. The latter plays a single Pittsburgh mom with a dyslexic daughter, trying to find a better school for her than the one's she's in, until she learns about a way to organize parents and teachers together into forging a better school system, even though it means defying the powerful teachers' union. Davis plays the first teacher Gyllenhaal recruits for the cause, one with a learning disabled child of her own, as well as a terrible secret.
![]() |
Co-star Dante Brown |
Still, the film does follow all the familiar Hollywood beats - romantic subplot, darkest hour, rally from an unexpected source, final confrontation - and the outcome is never in any real doubt. It's a formula that doesn't provide much in the way of surprises.
That said, however, Gyllenhaal and Davis make it watchable. I never really gave Gyllenhaal much thought beyond being Jake's sister, but she was powerful in a great role that let her shine. As for Davis, she had me from the start, but she also has a crucial late scene with her son that sold me on the entire film. She didn't oversell it - god knows she could have - but it was one more reminder of why her work is so admired by her peers. (If only it was admired enough to have given her that Oscar...)
------------------
Previously:
Being Mary Jane
Dar He: The Lynching of Emmett Till
Saturday, February 19, 2011
WSW @ The LAMB, Oscar style

Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)