|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 4, 2018 19:05:41 GMT
Quick interview w Pacino + Levinson www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2018/04/04/al-pacino-hbo-biopic-subject-joe-paterno-penn-state/483528002/Just interesting to think how often Pacino is attached to play real life people (from Napoleon, Matisse, Dali...to Onassis, which may still happen) and how he's always delivered when playing those roles (Serpico, Dog Day, AiA, YDKJ, Spector, the Insider...there hasn't been that many). Last year alone he played Tennessee Williams on stage and then filmed back to back Paterno + Hoffa. That's some relishing!
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 6, 2018 15:51:51 GMT
From Roeper's actual review below:
"But it’s been a long time since he was PACINO GREAT in memorable material — as Will Dormer opposite Robin Williams in “Insomnia” (2002), as Roy Cohn in the HBO miniseries “Angels in America” (2003) and as Jack Kevorkian in the HBO movie “You Don’t Know Jack” (2010)."
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 6, 2018 15:54:24 GMT
Quick interview w Pacino + Levinson www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2018/04/04/al-pacino-hbo-biopic-subject-joe-paterno-penn-state/483528002/Just interesting to think how often Pacino is attached to play real life people (from Napoleon, Matisse, Dali...to Onassis, which may still happen) and how he's always delivered when playing those roles (Serpico, Dog Day, AiA, YDKJ, Spector, the Insider...there hasn't been that many). Last year alone he played Tennessee Williams on stage and then filmed back to back Paterno + Hoffa. That's some relishing! Didn't HBO do a deal with Denzel to do several August Wilson adaptations in the wake of Fences? Maybe Pacino can negotiate his Shakespeare work with HBO and finally get King Lear to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 6, 2018 17:14:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 6, 2018 17:41:45 GMT
Maybe Pacino can negotiate his Shakespeare work with HBO and finally get King Lear to happen. Pacino’s always loved the idea of dethroned, deposed or addlepated “kings” - and he’s played many, the ending King Lear stuff in The Humbling was added, that wasn’t in the novel I don’t think - just his whole career feels like it’s leading up to Lear, and he’d probably want it that way. We’ve been teased about it actually happening since at least ’09. I don’t think he’s in a rush to do it; on Charlie Rose a few years ago he said he felt he was either “too young or too old” to play Lear yet. But then in Dec ’16 he said “I’m ready!” and suggested he’d be doing it in a year’s time. Btw around then Michael Radford said Lear was probably his next project (“Just waiting on Al.”) — but what I think happened was these other long gestating projects (Paterno, Irishman) came around and took over last year. Back in June ’17 the producer (Barry Navidi) created an LLC for King Lear; usually an indicator that pre-production is truly rolling. And holy shit I hope so. I don’t think financing is the problem; they don’t need HBO. And the director Radford has teased the cast - he’s mentioned Depp, Chastain, Emily Blunt, John Hurt rip - so there’ll be a big name cast to surround Pacino with I’d imagine. HBO (or Netflix) would be a better fit for the Onassis miniseries they're developing for Pacino... Plus how’s he’s gonna win that 2nd Oscar (3rd after Irishman? ) if it ain’t a theatrical release !!
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 6, 2018 17:46:44 GMT
Maybe Pacino can negotiate his Shakespeare work with HBO and finally get King Lear to happen. Pacino’s always loved the idea of dethroned, deposed or addlepated “kings” - and he’s played many, the ending King Lear stuff in The Humbling was added, that wasn’t in the novel I don’t think - just his whole career feels like it’s leading up to Lear, and he’d probably want it that way. We’ve been teased about it actually happening since at least ’09. I don’t think he’s in a rush to do it; on Charlie Rose a few years ago he said he felt he was either “too young or too old” to play Lear yet. But then in Dec ’16 he said “I’m ready!” and suggested he’d be doing it in a year’s time. Btw around then Michael Radford said Lear was probably his next project (“Just waiting on Al.”) — but what I think happened was these other long gestating projects (Paterno, Irishman) came around and took over last year. Back in June ’17 the producer (Barry Navidi) created an LLC for King Lear; usually an indicator that pre-production is truly rolling. And holy shit I hope so. I don’t think financing is the problem; they don’t need HBO. And the director Radford has teased the cast - he’s mentioned Depp, Chastain, Emily Blunt, John Hurt rip - so there’ll be a big name cast to surround Pacino with I’d imagine. HBO (or Netflix) would be a better fit for the Onassis miniseries they're developing for Pacino... Plus how’s he’s gonna win that 2nd Oscar (3rd after Irishman? ) if it ain’t a theatrical release !! Well, as long as he picks Mark Rylance for the Fool . . .
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 6, 2018 18:18:45 GMT
I go back and forth on King Lear he should do it (and Rylance would be a glorious Fool), but I mean he gets roles swiped or passes on them a lot - on stage in Orphans (by Alec Baldwin) and Iceman Cometh (by Spacey) and on film too - and Lear is being filmed for TV this year by Hopkins. At a certain point he has to do it or he lets it slip away..........I think the interesting thing is Once Upon A Time In Hollywood which if he does it, opens up some other stuff for him potentially in film and maybe gets him diverted from Lear or re-focused on it hopefully.
It's kind of funny that Paterno and Hoffa may be viewed as yet another "comeback" for him (he's always in career trouble lol) when he's had them on his to do list for a very long time......the Tarantino film if he does it is a whole new thing it seems to me, a twist on the cusp of turning 80.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 7, 2018 16:40:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Apr 8, 2018 17:28:33 GMT
Very good stuff, but not on the level of Wizard of Lies/YDKJ for me.
There are times where it goes too long without Paterno on screen... Keough is good but the stuff with the reporter wasn't that thrilling.
Pacino is excellent of course, but Paterno is kind of just a boring old man. I'm not sure it's a "his best performance since _________" kind of performance, but he is definitely in top form.
Ending seemed kind of rushed...
7-7.5/10 for me.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 8, 2018 17:57:59 GMT
I would say as a performance its another terrific one - 4 for 4 for the HBO films. To me it's more "there" than Spector (which I also love, but thought was really a supporting turn) though not an overwhelming tour de force like YDK Jack - so it sits between them in his list for me. (I rank YDK Jack really high because he had to play a medical doctor which is really tough to pull off and if he doesn't convince you he's a man of medicine, it fails right there).
As a movie, I'd go 7.5 and say it's the most prominent directed one he's been involved in lately - Levinson didn't do much in YDK Jack or Wizard of Lies except really turn them over to Pacino, DeNiro, Pfeiffer imo and Mamet wrote a witty script for Spector but that was directed just ok and ended really badly (I'm sure it was cut down by HBO). But here Levinson is much more upfront and in control of the framing device and pace (mostly) and the ending I thought was a bit of knockout/gut punch.
This is the only one of Pacino's HBO films where he isn't acting opposite a female heavyweight (Streep, Sarandon, Mirren) and somewhat surprisingly it's also the least showy of his 4 performances. Don't think he's in this enough to snag a 3rd Emmy particularly against the mini-series competition which is going to have way more screen time but nods for Pacino and Levinson and I would assume Keough, who was quite good.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 9, 2018 2:08:38 GMT
I agree with you guys, 7-7.5/10
Yes, the film is a little messy, but to Levinson’s credit he’s juggling a helluva lot. And a good amount of scenes have a great energy, tensity, immediacy. I liked the use of archive footage, how it’s almost snuck into the film, and I thought the family dynamic was handled well within the home. Keough’s good…in a different project she could’ve been more the focus etc, there’s plenty interesting angles there.
But for this film, it’s all about our guy, Pacino. His fading potentate Paterno is unlike anything he’s done before. He’s never played this old. And he’s so believably feeble and deflated, shuffling around shoulder-slung, you completely forget how peppy Pacino is in real life. Even though the character is mentally fraying, loosely conveying a guarded guilt, Pacino’s performance is dialed in: increasingly with every scene he shows - it’s barely stated but subtly shown thru inflections and of course his eyes - how his Paterno is becoming more and more troubled with himself. There’s guilt, contrition, confusion, etc…it’s all cleverly tuned by Pacino in what’s quite a difficult role, the delicate subject matter aside.
So that’s my Pacino perf ramble - !
Also....anybody else pick up on these terms heard in the film: “heir apparent” (re Sandusky) and “fiefdom” ....they really bring to mind that King Lear connection and - you can’t hold it against the project and what it is - but just imaging De Palma’s operatic big scale take...I mean it might’ve been something special.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Apr 9, 2018 2:21:44 GMT
Pacino's great, Keough is good... film is less than stellar.
This either needed to be a miniseries to better convey both sides of the narrative (Paterno's and the media's) but when it's messily put together a lot of stuff not only gets muddled, but also a little repetitive... or it needed to be shorter and put more focus on one of the other. It was like one part Spotlight and one part ...And Justice For All. Both very good films (one even boasting another amazing Pacino performance) but if you're trying to combine the two, then like that gyro you got at 3 AM from the guy down the corner... it ain't sitting right.
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Apr 9, 2018 3:04:05 GMT
Also....anybody else pick up on these terms heard in the film: “heir apparent” (re Sandusky) and “fiefdom” ....they really bring to mind that King Lear connection and - you can’t hold it against the project and what it is - but just imaging De Palma’s operatic big scale take...I mean it might’ve been something special. I can't even begin to imagine how De Palma's version of this movie would look... definitely a missed opportunity though I'm glad we still got a great Pacino performance (and are getting a new De Palma film in the same year). Side note: just remembered the existence of the possibility of Retribution......................
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 9, 2018 12:10:55 GMT
One of the problems with this type of project is you open yourself to weird criticism right up front because no one wants to talk about it but yet everyone has an opinion too - you get say Sports Illustrated or Joe Wackjob sports blogger "reviewing" it but they're reviewing from a perspective that is not in any sense an artistic one. On the flipside you get movie fans comparing it to say Spotlight -not in this thread, I mean in general (and as a film I thought that was ok but actually inferior because it doesn't have a great central performance) but that of course is decidedly not what this film is either really - i.e. there's no Paterno larger than life figure to refract the scandal through there. In a certain sense Spotlight is easier and more abstract too - who would ever watch something like Spotlight and say they were being "unfair to the Church" - where is the risk in Spotlight? I give Levinson a lot of credit here because as a director there's no way you make this film without half the people going "WRONG - you weren't there pal!" and he at least had an artistic conception that he stuck to his guns with and went with. Nobody would go after the actors or the relatively unknown screenwriters but the director, who has to be the one to stick his neck out, well he gets all the grief
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 10, 2018 21:54:11 GMT
Side note: just remembered the existence of the possibility of Retribution...................... June ’16 De Palma said (and this was its first mention after the initial Nov '14 informal announcement) : "I’d like to make “Retribution” with Pacino, but it depends on whether we can get it cast. Everybody’s out there trying to get those four financeable actors to get their movies made. When you don’t get them, it can go on for years." Hard to picture Pacino at 80 in the role, but anyway it sucks that they couldn't even get financing for it in the first place. Would love 'em to reteam on something.... Domino making it into the Cannes lineup would be great for De Palma n bring him a lotta attention ("what're you doing next" - that sorta thing). We'll know in a day or two...
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 10, 2018 22:04:43 GMT
I would say Pacino's performance in Paterno actually invalidates the possibility of doing it now, because he hints at a kind of dementia in Paterno anyway - so I think that might be tempting things in a bad repeating himself way.
I recently saw The Fear on Netflix which had a very great Peter Mullan performance and also is somewhat like Retribution (the original film I mean The Memory Of A Killer) - I'm afraid that's as close to it as we might get.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 11, 2018 4:27:00 GMT
I feel there were a couple of good movies buried somewhere in Paterno (the first a Woodward/Bernstein-esque tale of a dogged reporter trying to break a sensational story; the second about a beloved figurehead trying to reconcile the downfall of his illustrious career because of inaction or outright guilt), but the final product just kinda splits the difference and winds up cutting its own legs from under it. Pacino is remarkably immersive in Paterno’s physicality, but aside from a couple of inspired glimmers, he’s largely unable to do anything except wander around with a befuddled look on his face. Riley Keough is adept, proving herself to be a strong talent on her own, but she’s saddled with a thinly-sketched “crack reporter” stereotype. I’d actually argue that Greg Grunberg is the film’s MVP: he perfectly plays the frustration and moral conscience of Paterno’s son and kind of holds the whole thing together. It’s a well-shot movie, but the script just doesn’t sink its teeth into the meat of its title character or the incidents that laid low his career and reputation.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 11, 2018 18:00:06 GMT
Grunberg is a perfect example of why the Emmy's or TV Awards in general are a problem nowadays - there's no way he can really get nominated imo compared to Mini-Series casts with bigger screen times/storylines but the "name" people of course are either a lock (Pacino) or have a decent shot (Keough, Levinson) - the rise of the Mini-Series format on different platforms makes it all a little uneven.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 14, 2018 18:18:55 GMT
This is what Scott Feinberg lists as frontrunners Emmy in the Hollywood Reporter. Although I am having a hard time believing John Legend over Michael B. Jordan?
Feinberg is such a wackadoodle when he makes picks anyway.
Darren Criss (The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story) Al Pacino (Paterno) John Legend (Jesus Christ Superstar) Kyle MacLachlan (Twin Peaks) Jeff Daniels (The Looming Tower) Antonio Banderas (Genius: Picasso)
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 14, 2018 18:43:05 GMT
This is what Scott Feinberg lists as frontrunners Emmy in the Hollywood Reporter. Although I am having a hard time believing John Legend over Michael B. Jordan? Feinberg is such a wackadoodle when he makes picks anyway. Darren Criss (The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story) Al Pacino (Paterno) John Legend (Jesus Christ Superstar) Kyle MacLachlan (Twin Peaks) Jeff Daniels (The Looming Tower) Antonio Banderas (Genius: Picasso) As long as MacLachlan is there. Guy deserves every award in the world.
|
|