|
Post by wilcinema on Sept 3, 2018 8:01:48 GMT
It was the day of The Sisters Brothers here in Venice yesterday. Audiard, Reilly and Desplat were all there at the Lido for the official screening, and the audience ATE IT UP. The movie is that good. It's the first English-language feature for Audiard, and we've seen plenty of times how even seasoned directors have struggled with that. Audiard doesn't fail, and delivers a Western story about a family, about another family, about a country, about an age. It's been wrongly labeled as a comedy, which it kind of is but also kind of isn't. It's more of a dramedy with elements of tragedy, with lost characters seeking a sense in life, a purpose, a bonding. There are many qualities to THE SISTERS BROTHERS: the beautiful cinematography, the lovely music, the editing. But what really stands out is the ensemble. John C. Reilly, at his career-best, almost pierces the screen with his gentle persona in such a dark and hostile world as the Far West; Joaquin Phoenix keeps up with him, providing the usually perfect neurotic character with nuances of sadness and pain; and then there's the Nightcrawler duo: there's something about Jake Gyllenhall (who's never been this good since Nightcrawler) and Riz Ahmed that just works, they have such a perfect chemistry and they give their characters layers that maybe didn't even exist in the original script. Even though the four actors don't share much screentime together, the film is so well directed and edited that it feels like they're actually all there, never losing cohesion. They make THE SISTERS BROTHERS a character study, a chamber piece set in the wilderness, which is quite a feat, if you ask me. Good job, Jacques!
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Sept 3, 2018 16:39:33 GMT
I can’t wait to see this.
|
|
|
Post by Allenism on Sept 9, 2018 19:12:49 GMT
Kind of a weird movie. The dialogue sounded anachronistically modern for a Western. Tone jumps for silly to serious without much gradation in between. John C. Reilly is a solid lead but it's not the kind of performance that usually attracts any major hardware. Phoenix and Gyllenhaal both service their respective parts but have been much better elsewhere. Ahmed is probaly the best out of the supporting cast, and really establishes him as a major film presence even if he has the least amount of screen-time.
Overall I can see this netting a few tech noms (cinematography is aces) and maybe one for adapted screenplay and Reilly, but that's it.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 9, 2018 19:15:29 GMT
I'm really excited to see it. I dug the book, I'm a sucker for a good Western (especially if it's from a more untraditional director, like Audiard), and I'm really stoked for Reilly's almost unanimous MVP notices. I think he's a strong player for the Comedy/Musical Globe nod (and if Stan & Ollie comes out as expected, double nods?), even though he's likely losing to Cooper in the end.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2018 5:25:19 GMT
This thing has a great cast but the title really annoys me for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 28, 2018 1:30:15 GMT
Managed to catch this one as a sneak preview tonight.
So The Sisters Brothers is, right out of the gate, not exactly playing it straight. Hell, the first thing we see is the steadily mounting names of production houses filling the screen, as if the director is coyly thumbing his nose at the indie nature of the movie. And indeed, The Sisters Brothers is pretty much a Frenchman’s idea of a Western, from top to bottom. Traditionalism is thrown out the window in favor of a bizarre, off-kilter tone that might rub some people raw, but utterly enchant others.
Count me in the latter category.
The story of the titular fraternal assassins—John C. Reilly as the dutiful Eli and Joaquin Phoenix as the mercurial Charlie—is certainly a tale that eschews convention, as both men are hired to track down a chemist (Riz Ahmed) and kill him for his potentially world-changing formula. Meanwhile, an opportunistic scout (a dandified Jake Gyllenhaal) crosses paths with the chemist first and warms to him.
It’s a story with more than its fair share of shoot-‘em-ups and bloody dealings, but the film’s core tension is between Reilly and Phoenix. Their fractious bond feels well-worn, scarred by decades of shared tough experiences. Reilly is the more introverted of the two, whereas Phoenix goes for broke as only he can. It’s easy to point to Charlie as the more dynamic brother because of this, but Eli is the one who lingers more in the mind. The other duo is almost equally superb, with Gyllenhaal playing a character seemingly borne from a lost Coen Brothers film that perfectly plays to his sensibilities while still retaining an outlandishness that manages to remain believable.
The Sisters Brothers is a weird movie. It’s not the sort of thing the Academy is going to easily gravitate towards (although I would pencil in Phoenix and Reilly for Globe nods at the very least), but the craft is most definitely there. Alexandre Desplat’s arrhythmic score perfectly suits Audiard’s offbeat direction and Milena Canonero's costume work is among her very best (no mean feat, that). And the actors are all at the top of their game. Audiard's first English-language feature does what a lot of foreign directors who make the jump to Hollywood fail to do: it retains the auteur's energy without the director surrendering that which makes them unique.
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Sept 28, 2018 1:37:48 GMT
Oh cool, I was there too. After two very different trailers I wasn’t sure what to expect, tone wise. It’s very light and sprinkled with a lot of fun moments, but it’s also gritty and heavy at times. Most of all it was an unpredictable journey with some great characters that I got very invested in. God, Gyllenhaal was so good as a pretentious tool, and Reilly was a great straight man to Phoenix’s more outlandish character — they share wonderful chemistry. I also really dug Rebecca Root and Carol Kane in small parts. On a technical level I thought there was a great attention to detail with the makeup and art direction, and Desplat’s score was really lovely. I had some issues with the editing and pacing at times, but over all this was a really fun and worthwhile ride. Don’t see it getting nominated for much (anything?) though.
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Sept 28, 2018 20:45:08 GMT
This was quite good! IMO the trailer didn't do it justice and is pretty misleading. Loved Reilly & Phoenix in this . Great chemistry all around . Also loved seeing the reuniting of the Nightcrawler boys together on screen again . The pacing could have been a bit better in some parts but no biggie. Overall, I really enjoyed this one & would recommend seeing it in theaters . 8/10
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Oct 25, 2018 20:07:35 GMT
Pretty disappointing... The first hour or so is really good -- John C. Reilly and Joaquin are great together, the early scenes between Jake/Riz are strong (didn't realize this was a Nightcrawler reunion until halfway through the movie ), and cutting back and forth between the two pairs kept things interesting... But once the Sisters bros buddy up with Morris/Kermit and start prospecting it becomes a massive slog. It took all the weight out of the movie for me. And when Charlie spills the tub of chemicals it just became STUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPID. Then when I thought the movie had a chance to redeem itself with the potential awesomeness of Eli's plan to kill The Commodore, the prospect is erased like nothing. And the ending is a big fat meh. But... almost all of my problems are with the plot. The cinematography and scenery are absolutely amazing... Desplat's score is great, John C. Reilly and Joaquin are both great and the brotherly bond is special........ but damn, that plot really fucked things up. 6 or a 6.5/10 for me.
|
|
|
Post by evilbliss on Nov 18, 2018 14:27:39 GMT
I saw it last night with Jacques Audiard in the audience and then after a brief Q&A with him. Nice movie and I never thought John C. Reilly and Joaquin Phoenix had such great chemistry!
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Dec 26, 2018 22:11:53 GMT
I really liked this. It's been a couple of hours since I finished watching it and the aftertaste already becomes better and better. Very good stuff with its palpable air of melancholia, pleasure of small details and delightful performances. I also thought that the rather unfancy photography did quite a good job at getting to the reality of what it must've felt like to be in those dusty towns and those forests. The period details somehow became more alive because of how unglamorous it all looked. A real good movie.
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Dec 31, 2018 15:14:42 GMT
Solid Western adaptation with two very dynamic leads. The story was quite interesting and but what really stood out was the great chemistry between John C. Reilly and Joaquin Phoenix. Both excellent actors and both delivering great performances. I think the one I preferred was Phoenix, who proved some little attempts to comedy talent here. I hope he continues. John C. Reilly was also very effective and this is just further prove that this actor deserves more dramatic leading roles. He really nailed his character and gave him the right attitude. Jake Gyllenhaal was also quite good. Also he was able to go beyond what was written with his character. Always good to see Riz Ahmed getting challenging work. He is a great underrated actor. Also loved to see him teaming up with Gyllenhaal again after "Nightcrawler" in a similar relationship. The atmosphere was right there and the look and feel perfect for a western. I had a little trouble with the pace because after a very good beginning the film started to slow down a little. Never lost its quality but really created some lengths after a while.
Nominations:
None
Rating: 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Dec 31, 2018 17:55:43 GMT
Enjoyed this overall. Great scenery and outstanding performances throughout. Went downhill a bit after a couple of certain character’s deaths and really wanted the big confrontation to happen at the end. Nice ending scene though.
|
|
|
Post by getclutch on Jan 2, 2019 9:39:44 GMT
The cinematography and direction for this film was superb. The story is elegant, and the supporting cast is extremely solid.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Feb 11, 2019 3:27:37 GMT
Given the immense promise of the cast, Audiard, and the concept, this was pretty disappointing. The characters are too underwritten to make this a compelling examination of them, the plot is too inert for this to ever really work as a western thriller, and it's not clever enough to work as the dark comedy it was apparently supposed to be. Ahmed is characteristically-great and probably the best of the cast. This is perhaps the first time I've ever seen Phoenix going through the motions, but he has exactly one great moment in which he gives a deeply menacing smile upon realizing that he gets to kill someone. Reilly has a number of really strong moments but his character, intended to be the sympathetic core of the film, never fully comes together in the way that he should. Gyllenhaal is surprisingly lacking here, especially hurt by his distracting phony accent. You'd think actors as great as these would click into a dynamite chemistry, but it never happens to the extent that you would hope. Reilly and Phoenix have a decent rapport but it's not the lighting-in-a-bottle dynamic they needed to carry the film, while the relationship between Gyllenhaal and Ahmed really feels like it comes out of nowhere. The cinematography is absolutely spectacular, arguably often hypnotic, and that coupled with Desplat's solid score often create a poetic sensation to this that helps add weight to its contemplative approach. It has moments that work, but most of it just missed the mark. It's never a bad movie, but so much of it from the dialogue to the narrative construction feels too incomplete to land.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Feb 11, 2019 4:07:41 GMT
having a spider lay eggs in John C. Reilly's mouth was grosser than anything Croneneberg could've dreamt up also, the movie was extremely disappointing. Nothing exceptional or memorable about it at all save for Reilly's performance. Gyllenhaal might have done something interesting if he had been given more to work with. Joaquin and Ahmed were wasted on these parts. Just extremely dull all around.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Aug 2, 2019 1:53:51 GMT
Slow and plodding, but that final act was mighty touching stuff. If only it didn't take so long to get there. So I have the EXACT OPPOSITE view of Viced, but we're pretty much agreed on the rating. Btw, this is supposed to be a comedy now? I... don't see it at all?
|
|