A really big ask


Those were the days of extraordinary fame, extraordinary beauty and extraordinary talent.

In this movie we have three actors attempting to carry off roles representing three of the greatest stars that ever drew breath:

Michelle Williams, pretty, sweet, and with quite a good figure, having a good stab at playing the World's Most Adored Goddess, the Sexiest Woman and Most Incredibly Delicious Body on Planet Earth.
It has been said of Marilyn Monroe that she was SOOO beautiful that it was impossible for her to look plain..... and it is true that I (for one) have never seen a photograph of her, regardless of how casual the snapshot, in which she did not look exquisite.

This is the woman that Michelle Williams was challenged to play. While Marilyn had it all, the beauty, the body, the voice, the sex-appeal, Michelle Williams had to ACT as if she had all those things, to exactly the same degree as Marilyn. She doesn't, off course. No-one does. But Williams had a jolly good stab at it.

Julia Ormand had the challenge of playing the woman who had been acclaimed as the "most beautiful woman in the world". Vivien Leigh. And unless you are the current holder of that position, then it is a mighty big ask.

And Branagh, with his lop-sided face and naturally apologetic manner had to take on the role of the Icon of the British Stage, the Garrick of the Twentieth Century, more intense that Marlene Dietrich, more Romantic than Valentino, and more handsome than Cary Grant.

I think they did wonderfully.

I bought Williams as the sex goddess. I bought Ormand as the faded queen of the cinema. But most of all, I loooved Branagh doing Olivier. There were moments there when I forgot that I was not watching the man himself. And he has been my hero, ever since I saw Henry V at the Avon Cinema when I was 14. Well done!








"great minds think differently"

reply

I particularly liked that Branagh used words in the same manner as Olivier. For example Olivier said remembered as remem-ber-ed. The ed at the end was almost a separate word. Nice detailing.

You were right about Marylin always looking beautiful- never plaion. In "River of No Return" she was in grubby jeans and short, often wet and unkempt-but she still looked great.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

reply

I had a hard time with Branagh since he has such a big personality himself. I never felt like I was watching Olivier, but always thought of him as Branagh playig Olivier. If you can understand what I mean. That's what happens when you get too famous, besides he is not really a character actor at all. He needs the roles that are similar to his persona.



"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

reply

I don't agree entirely. Branagh makes a wonderful Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Really quite repulsive.



"great minds think differently"

reply

he was great as Henry V.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

reply

I am not a big Harry Potter fan, but from the ones I have seen all the costumes and props can make anyone look like someone other than himself. Without all that paraphernalia he usually seems like himself. Have you seen Wallender?

"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

reply

I haven't seen Wallender.

Regardless of the costumes and props, the acting by the vast majority of adult actors in the Harry Potter series is magnificent. As it happens, Branagh's character, who is a handsome charming author, requires a great deal less paraphernalia than that used to transform some of the actors, e.g. Alan Rickman who is playing a character 20 years younger than he is.






"great minds think differently"

reply

You should see some of his other works, like Wallender and Theory of flight, you really can't tell what I am talking about based on one costume movie where everyone is made up to look differently, including Branagh.

"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

reply

Are you suggesting that I haven't seen Kenneth Branagh in anything else, and am judging his ability on only two movies?

I am merely putting you right over the nature of the acting in HP, which setting aside the make-up, was excellent.

"great minds think differently"

reply

I never said he was a bad actor, just an actor that seems to always be recognizable in his parts, unlike some who go so much into character that they become unrecognizable and all you see is the person they are portraying..such as Donald Pleasance whom I just saw in Barchester Chronicles who with only some minor hair changes (less of it) and some eye glasses becomes his character and I forgot I was watching the excellent Donald Pleasance who usually plays villians in spy movies etc...

That is the sign of a really good actor, a character actor. I am merely saying I don't get that feeling with Branagh. Harry Potter was a bad example to prove your point..have you any others? HP was boring to me after a couple of them. Mainly written for a younger audience which I don't belong to. Same with Pirates of the C.

What other of Ken's movies have you seen?

"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

reply

Yes, I agree have to agree with you about Branagh "always being recognizable". I have mainly seen him playing Shakespeare- Hamlet, Henry V etc

I recently saw "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" and could hardly believe I was watching Garry Oldman. I thought he was magnificent. And, yes, Donald Pleasance was remarkable in the Barchester Chronicles.

As for HP, well, if you saw two and was bored, I'm not all that surprised. However, they picked up radically at Number Three. I had a young child with whom to enjoy children's movies.







"great minds think differently"

reply

I think watching it with a child would make a big difference. I loved Hugo and watched it alone.



"Sometimes you have to know when to put a cork in it."
~Frasier

reply