Tyler’s Films.

Going into a film with fairly high expectations is never a good thing, but from all the raves, and public love alike, I couldn’t go into the with with anything less than the utmost hope that it would be a crime film reminiscent of The French Connection. Anyways, here’s my review.

Ridley Scott, one of the best ‘inconsistant’ director’s of all time, brings us his latest film in American Gangster. Though most of his films have been dramatic or war oriented, he has done a crime flick here and there, none of them have been about ‘gangsters’. Well, his first shot at a gangster flick is a success. Though it could’ve been touched up, his direction is great nonetheless. His take on the screenplay was very good, making it predominantly suspenseful, rather than a gritty ‘bang-bang get the bad guy and go’ type film, which in my eyes would’ve been a disappointment. As I said, his direction could’ve been better, mainly because I was hoping for a Frank Lucas film, as in a film devoted to the man who was Frank Lucas, and not a film that spends about a third of it’s time showing corrupt cops, and their lives. In my opinion, the film would’ve benefited immensely with a less cliched outlook on crime.

The screenplay was adapted from an article in New York Magazine by veteran Steven Zaillian. As I said about Scott, this man has written ‘crime’ films before, but never a gangster one. He did a great job giving the audience a feel for both the man and the monster [roberts and lucas], but not so much Lucas. Throughout the whole film, I felt as if Lucas was more two-dimensional than Roberts (a supposed secondary character). There was unnecessary information about Roberts, but not enough information about Lucas, though Lucas dominated the film. It just felt a bit out of place. Besides this flaw, the dialog was sharp, but slightly cliched, mainly due in part by so many gangster films having the same feel. Again, as I previously mentioned, the film would’ve really benefited with more of an expose on Lucas. But for what it was, it was pretty damn good.

---

---

The acting of this predominately two man show was including, but not limited to just that.First off, this man was hidden talent that was unearthed last year, mainly due to his exposure in such films as Children of Men and his Golden Globe performance in Kinky Boots. I am talking of course about Chiwetel Ejiofor, who in this film plays Frank Lucas’ cousin “Huey Lucas“. I was very disappointed with the amount of screen time Ejiofor got, because he is such a talent, it hurts to see him be wasted so. His performance was about 15 minutes long, I’d say. Though he was limited to 10% of the film’s running, he was still very good, like usual. Every scene he had with Washington was great, because their chemistry was so realistic. Almost all of his dialog had meaning, and every line of it that he spoke was wonderful. Another great performance to add to his 2007 resume.This film also sports another great, ‘underrated, but not for long’ actor in Josh Brolin. This year alone he’s had 4 of the most acclaimed films, and he’s been either the leading actor, or had a major supporting role in 3 of them. In this film, he plays “Detective Trupo“, a crooked cop, who is relentless in his job, and is always out for number one: himself. Every so often you’ll find a film character that is one of the most despicable and the most rage filling that you’ll see. I believe this character is in the running for this year’s. Though there are a lot of antagonists in film (a lot of them played very averagely), Brolin gives the audience a realistic depiction of a ‘bad’ cop. It’s not common you’ll find an actor that can not only recite their lines, but also carry such an attitude that makes you have real emotions over a fictitious persona. If Brolin weren’t cast as Trupo, I think the film would’ve lagged.

Along with Casey Affleck in The Assassination…, if nominated, Russell Crowe will be said alike; that he belongs in the leading category, and I could not disagree more. He has as much screen time as Denzel, and probably has more dialog than him to boot. Anyways, onto the performance. Crowe plays “Richie Roberts“, who seems to be the only ‘good’ cop in the film. As I previously said, Crowe has more to work with than Denzel, as the film pries into his love life, working life, and his obsession with Lucas. He shows love, hate, disappointment, doubt and obsessiveness as well as any other actor working today. With this, Crowe delivers another excellent performance to add to his already extensive acting resume.

Onto the performance all critic’s have been talking about, Denzel Washington as “Frank Lucas“, the man who brought the streets back to the street. As far as criminals go, Lucas was by far one of the most interesting ones. A man who said what he meant, and meant what he said. Who was both a lover and a fighter. And a man who was both a criminal, but also honest. If you’re hoping for a film that’s all about Lucas, you will be distraught. While Washington’s performance is the best, it was sadly not as deep as Crowe’s character. Giving Washington less to work with, and less of an impact to make. Though, as we all know, Washington can turn nothing into something… a very big something at times. This is one of those times. He works with greed, anger, despair and aggression very well. So well in fact, that I’d call his performance dynamic. Overall, as well rounded a performance as any actor in this situation could’ve turned out.

---

---

This is a fairly technical film, but there wasn’t a wide variety of technical aspects to work with.Marc Streitenfeld composed the ever so reused ’street’ score. Though it does have an interesting difference or two, it’s basis is the same old, same old, and brings nothing new to the table. This is really disappointing for me, because his collaboration last year with Ridley Scott for the film A Good Year had one of the most amazing ones of the year/decade. I was just expecting more from him.The film editing is comme-çi comme-ça. It has it’s glorious moments, but then there are times where you just wish the scene were shorter, if not just not there at all. The pacing of the film is fine, and for a film that surpasses two and a half hours, it’s great. You’re constantly intrigued by the story, and there’s enough action to keep you wanting more.

The cinematography by the always great Harris Savides was great as always. He sets a really dark tone for the film to work with. His work for this film is all around great. One of the many great scenes he gives us, is the Ali vs. Frasier fight. The atmosphere is fantastic, mainly due in part to the lighting, and the perspective from the camera. Just wonderful stuff. Unfortunately, Savides does not make my Top 5 of the year, for the second time this year.

---

Nominations for American Gangster
None.

[Top Ten's]
Best Picture (#9)
Best Actor in a Leading Role - Denzel Washington (#6)
Best Actor in a Supporting Role - Russell Crowe (#7)
Best Adapted Screenplay - Steven Zaillian (#7)
Best Cinematography

Rating : 8.5/10

A sequel to one of the most praised films of the 90’s, with the same director, same principle actors, and same writer. What could one expect other than at least a great film. Well, recently the film has received panning review after panning review, and it shows. No longer are prediction sites taking the film seriously, and the same goes for critics. What was at one point in the year the most anticipated by most people, and thought to be the leading contender for Best Picture, is now a disaster in many eyes… here is my review.

The direction by Shekhar Kapur is fine. He chooses some key shots for some great scenarios. One of these would include the lovely head of the battle. The problem is when you think the film is about to pick up, with an intense climax, it just drops dead, and ends up repeating endless, boring plot. This really took away from the ‘enjoyment’ of the film. He gave us good scenes, but with the good came the boring and pointless ones. At times I was just focusing on other things, for the film was just that simplistic.

The scripting of the film by Michael Hirst and William Nicholson (former Oscar nominee on two accounts) was good. The plot was simple, easy to follow, and for it some may find it enjoyable. But with a simple plot, comes tedious dialog. The only thing out of the ordinary was some of the slightly unexpected scenes. These include the lovely chat between “Queen Elizabeth” and “Robert Reston“; which was both well written, and a put a smirk on my face. Although the film seems way too light hearted to be taken seriously, it is a very relaxing film for those that enjoy calm cinema, as opposed to heavy dramatic situations. As I previously stated, some will take to this film horribly, and go right for the negatives, with cut throat, ruthless anger against it. But for those who enjoy light drama/romances (yes, it has it’s fair share of romance), you should be pleasantly surprised. My final thought on the script, is if Hirst and Nicholson wanted this film to be remembered, script wise, they would’ve put in a final confrontation with “Elizabeth” and “Mary Stuart“; which would be remembered as the scene of the year, no doubt.

---

Onto the fantastic ensemble, containing a lot of the principle actors from the 1998 film. I will only state the performances that stood out in my eyes, for there are far too many performances to comment on.Geoffrey Rush reprises his role as “Sir Francis Walsingham“, the Queen’s most dutiful subject. He does not have a lot of screen time, (due to most of the plot being devoted to the escalating romantic tension between Owen and Blanchett) but he does a very good job with what he’s given. Even though you may know him more for his silly roles in films like Pirates of the Caribbean and Finding Nemo, one wouldn’t suspect him to be such a poetic actor. It seems that every film he’s in, he always brings this mythotical presence with him, creating interest whenever he’s on screen. The great thing about Rush, is that he always owns his roles, and it never seems like anything is forced upon him. I just wish he had more screen time.Abbie Cornish plays “Elizabeth Throckmorton“, Elizabeth’s ’servant’ as you will. At the beginning of the year, many thought she would be the star of the film, outshining the rest of the cast with her role. Though she was given a fairly substantial role, I felt that her dialog was underwhelming, besides a few scenes. I went into the movie thinking she’d have more of a dominating part, but juxtapose to Jennifer Jason Leigh in Margot at the Wedding, her performance is good, but only a few scenes standout.Clive Owen plays “Sir Walter Raleigh“, the love interest of the Queen in this film. For such a large role, he does not have much to work with, which is a shame, for Owen is one of the most interesting actors to come out of this decade. The dialog that this role contains is just mediocre. All he does is confess love here and there, which is unappealing. The sad thing is whenever he’s given a good scene, he seems to be stuck in his bland character so much that whatever he says is just not as great as it could be, if you understand what I’m saying.Samantha Morton plays “Mary Stuart” (and for those of you who are history buffs “Mary I of Scotland“), the antagonist of the film. Sadly, her role is limited to about 8 minutes on the screen, meaning less time for the best performance of the film to grace our presence. If I were the screenplay writers, I’d of based the film around the attempted assassination of the Queen, rather than give some melodramatic love story a chance to blossom. The story in which Morton is apart of is by far the best part of the film, giving intrigue and suspense at every turn. As for Morton’s role in this plot, she was fantastic. One of the most magnificent limited performances of all time.Onto the big shot of the film, Cate Blanchett as “Queen Elizabeth“. As far as the film concerned, it’s the acting that saves it from being a failure; Blanchett is one of these main factors. As we saw in Elizabeth, Blanchett can hold her own in any scenario, making you believe that whomever she is playing is not Blanchett, but the person them self. Not unlike Morton, her role is full of passion, but unlike, Morton I mean this in more than one sense. She displays rage, lust, and determination as well as any other actor/actress I’ve ever seen before. The great thing about Blanchett is that she can go from being the most loud, terrifying person in one scene, but yet the most joyful, happy in the next. Top notch acting in my books.

---

---

Here we are with the technical aspects of the film, which were just lovely.The score, composed by one of India’s most accomplished composers A.R. Rahman and a former Golden Globe winning composer in Craig Armstrong, you’d expect a wonderful score, but alas it is as drawn out and plain as it can get. It adds a melancholic tone to the film, which we need not of, since the film already contains that type of atmosphere. But with that, I guess it goes with how the film is. It’s just I’d of rather preferred something more substantial, to go with such an ‘epic’ film.The visual effects are fine for the budget the film had, but I assume ambition exceeded their budget, or at least I hope so for Kapur’s sake. As I mentioned earlier, when the climax begins to pick up, it is cut short either due to bad direction or just a low budget. But for what it is worth, the scenes in which CGI is used, are good.The costume design, along with the art direction is beautiful. The clothing is as prestigious as you could get, and the same goes for the art decoration. With the costume design, it ranges from lovely dresses to wonderful uniforms for soldiers. With the art decoration it ranges from elegant ballrooms to the ragged insides of boats. What would one suspect more from a film set in the 1600’s?Finally, for the cinematography, Kapur decided to bring back Remi Adefarasin, the award nominated cinematographer for their last collaboration together in Elizabeth. All around, the cinematography is just wonderful. Some scenes are just flat out fantastic, while others are just good. In such a fantastic year for cinematography, I don’t know if this film will be nominated or not in this category, but I’ll sure as hell remember it for being another great achievement.

---

Nominations for Elizabeth : The Golden Age
Best Actress in a Leading Role - Cate Blanchett (#5)
Best Art Direction (#5)

Rating : 7/10

After Sidney Lumet’s return to directing last year with indie film Find Me Guilty, many people thought that he would stay an independent director. Well at the moment, that seems to be where he’s staying, which in this case is a very good thing.

His vision for this very simple idea turned the film into a very interesting ordeal. As we all know, certain films couldn’t be the same without Lumet’s immaculate direction. This is one of those films. He turns the already intense script into a film that is about harsh realization of the world, and the people that inhabit it.

The screenplay was written by one of the year’s many new talents, Kelly Masterson. The script about 2 brothers that rob a jewelry story, and it all goes wrong sounds quite cliched, but this script follows a different track then one would expect. Turn after turn, this film contains some of the most appealing ideas of the year. Along with this, the 2 brothers are very, very well written, but sadly the rest of the cast is written fairly bland-like. This is diappointing for the fans of Marisa Tomei, who’s character is on the screen for about 10 minutes of the entire film. Other than this flaw, the whole premise is wonderful, and I hope to see more of this person’s work, when they do more that is.

---

The acting of this tremendous ensemble cast is great. From the powerhouse performance of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, to the subtle performance of Albert Finney, the main actors all do a wonderful job.We’ll start with the disappointingly short performance by Marisa Tomei. Along with the sad fact she is in the film for less than 10% of it, she also doesn’t have much to work with. For every scene with dialog and meaning she has, there are 2 with her just topless, listening to the other characters. The only good thing that came out of this whole ‘character’ was that Tomei made the role at least bearable.

Onto Albert Finney’s great work as “Charles“, the father of the 2 brothers. He has a fair amount of screentime, slightly less than Ethan Hawke’s amount of screen. His character is very well written, and all a lot of the plot is what gives him so much to work with. He goes through a wide variety of emotions in a short, but considerable amount of time, which adds to the pleasure of watching the movie. Overall, this is just another great performance to add to his already outstanding resume, and if the Academy is going to go all veteran-nominated this year, Finney should be way up there for Best Actor in a Supporting Role.

Even though Ethan Hawke’s role as “Hank” is played off as one of the leading roles, I’d consider him borderline leading, only because more of the story is devoted to Hoffman’s character and his life. Anyways, Hawke’s character is the most complex in the whole film. A brother that witnesses a horrible tragedy, and the events that ensue afterwards makes his character all the more interesting. This role is also quite the change in character for Hawke, so it was surprising to see him pull of the role with such poise. Delivering every heartbroken line with sorrow in one scene, and screaming out his pain in another, this role is very versatile, and Hawke just nails it. Since Before Sunrise, we’ve known Ethan Hawke has immense talent, and this film just shows it further.

Onto the performance of the film, and the main reason I caught this in the first place. This reason is Phillip Seymour Hoffman as “Andy“. This role is written very well, but the character doesn’t go through many changes at all. He basically is just angry a lot of the time, insincere, oddly humorous and at times ponders situations. Well, for such a compact character, Hoffman finds away to make him the most interesting of the cast. He captivates the audience with his quick transitions; going from playful to over the top anger. Basically what I’m saying is his mere presence on the screen makes you drop your jaw, because he has an very vibrant way to him that makes you sympathize for him, even if you know he is in the wrong. As well know, Phillip Seymour Hoffman can do so much with so little, and in this film he shows what he can do when that little is just slightly bigger.

---

---

There weren’t many technical aspects to work with, but when ‘techs’ were important, the technical team really came through. The first of the two standouts in the field for this film was the score, done by Carter Burwell. Innovative, captivating, but yet not good enough to garner a nomination as of now in the year. Too strong a category for me, but hopefully the academy will recognize his genius… someday. To conclude my review, the most outstanding tech of the film was the film editing, because without it, the film would not have been as original without it.

---

Nominations for Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead
Best Actor in a Leading Role - Phillip Seymour Hoffman (#2) (could be my win. i need to think about it more)
Best Original Screenplay - Kelly Masterson (#5)
Best Film Editing - (#1!)

3 Nominations and 1 Win.

Rating : 8.5/10

I caught a premiere screening of this tonight, and went into with hopes of a fairly engaging drama/thriller, but what I ended up getting was one of the most powerful, explosive and suspenseful films of this year, let alone decade.

What comes to your mind when you think of Ben Affleck? Hack, bad actor, snobby, talentless, etc… These opinions are based on people running their mouths, and other people following the trend, and once people see this film, they cannot call him ‘talentless’ any further. He displays some of the most intense direction of this year, and it being his first time behind the camera, really gives me a new view on how versatile this man is. Great actor (when he chooses the right roles), excellent screenwriter, and now a top notch director? Who would’ve thought.

Along with the direction of the film, Ben Affleck along with Aaron Stockford adapted the Dennis Lehane novel of the same name. Now, I haven’t read the book, or even given any thought to do so, but after this experience, I think I must read it. The screenplay hits you on so many levels. It starts at the beginning, with the tear inducing scenario. As it progresses, you get caught up in “Patrick Kenzie’s” mindset, so you feel as he feels. This includes rage, disgust, fear and anticipation. Further on into the film, you get twists and turns everywhere, but not in a messy flurry, but in a well paced, coherent fashion. Overall, I’d say this film has it all. From some of the best scenes of the year, to some of the most interesting characters.

---

---

The cast of this film is exactly what I thought of the film; fabulous.We’ll start off with the most disappointing performance of the movie, Morgan Freeman as “Jack Doyle“. It isn’t ‘disappointing’ in the negative, “he was horrible” type of way, but disappointing because the trailers play this film off has him being a major supporting player, where he is in it for no more than 10 minutes. Though, the positive thing about this is that for the brief time Freeman is on the screen, you cannot avoid him. He dominates the screen with his presence, and it is felt.

Onto a performance I didn’t expect much of going into the movie, Michelle Monaghan as Patrick’s girlfriend and partner in Private Investigations, “Angie Gennaro“. She wasn’t bad at all, I just preferred the rest of the cast to her. The sad thing is, for all the time she’s given on screen, there isn’t really much for her to work with. She’s just there, standing behind Affleck. Though the bad isn’t without it’s good, because when she is actually given a juicy scene, she runs with it. She is a great actress, and I’m glad to see her in a huge supporting role (or partial lead, depending on your take), in such a grand film.

A lot of people (around here) are considering Amy Ryan to be a dark horse in this year’s Supporting Actress race. For those who are interested, or do not know who she is, you probably will soon. She plays “Helene McCready“, the mother of the kidnapped daughter. To be honest, she did impress me. I never considered her for anything major. Actually, I never gave the idea a second thought, until now. This performance mirrors that of Mercedes Ruehl’s in The Fisher King, just more ‘ghetto’. Sure, the trailers play her off as a sincere mother missing her daughter, but in the film she is a completely different person, and what some would call a ‘hood-rat’. For the first quarter of the film, she has a heavy hand in the plot, and with that has quite a large role, but after that quarter is up, she is almost nowhere to be seen. Basically, what I’m saying here is if you love powerful, standout roles that consist of 20 minutes in length, then this is a major reason for you to see it.

Ed Harris, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy. An actor with one of the most outstanding resumes, and certainly deserving of it. What can I say about this man that hasn’t been said before? He takes the role of “Det. Remy Bressant to another level, not without thanks to the wonderful script. In his scenes as a man hunting cop, he is very convincing, mainly because he carries himself in such a way, it’s hard to separate the fact that it’s acting to reality. Along with these scenes, he has very intense fits of rage and passion that are just wonderful. A very well rounded performance by Mr. Harris, indeed.

Onto the lead of the film, and the main reason I saw this film, Casey Affleck. He plays P.I “Patrick Kenzie“, who is constantly on the prowl for information. From what I saw in the trailer, he looked kinda out of place and stale with his perpetuation of dialog. But during the film, I found that they chose really good snippets of scenes, but just placed them horribly for the marketing. Take for example Amy Ryan saying “Promise me you’ll find her. Promise me!” and he goes “I promise”. It seems so awkwardly acted, but yet in the film it flows so naturally. Alright, so onto his performance as a whole. Mr. Affleck was just incredible in this role, and certainly not what you’d expect. Normally in these films, you’ve got a ruthless protagonist, who’d do anything to find the missing person. Yet in this film, he plays the role with subtlity and quirkiness, which adds a compelling element to the plot. This element is ‘will he do it or not’, which occurs a lot through the film in many situations, which makes the film more unpredictable, and therefore more enjoyable.

---

---

Onto the technical aspects of the film. I can’t really say much in this category, except that the film editing was a crucial element throughout the entirety. The constantly engaging pace made the film what it was. The editing was also very important in the last half an hour, displaying many important scenes in a very orderly fashion.The cinematography was fine, but nothing too outstanding in my eyes. The only exception being a wonderful overhead shot of a quarry, which was just breathtaking and added beauty, as well as an unsettling peaceful scenario.

Finally, the score composed by Harry Gregson-Williams was fairly uninspired, and was the only real noticeable fault in this section. While the whole film is suspenseful, this reused, cliche dreck plays in the background more often than not. I’m not saying it doesn’t do it’s job to add that extra hint of suspense. All I’m saying is that it was disappointing for such an astounding film to have such a mediocre score.

---

Nominations for Gone Baby Gone
Best Picture (#3)
Best Actress in a Supporting Role - Amy Ryan (#5)
Best Director - Ben Affleck (#2)
Best Adapted Screenplay - Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard (#1!)
Best Film Editing (#2)

Rating : 9/10

Well, I was kind of turned off by the running time, so I was expecting a film as well made as any other this year, but as boring as Silk. Well, I was surprised by how much I liked this film.

Andrew Dominik, the director of the film did a great job capturing the presence of Jesse James, as well as the vulnerability of Robert Ford, making this seemingly slow drama turn into something much more; great character study. With this, he also brought some of the most astounding atmosphere of the year, with beautiful shots and memorable scenes. Thought the film is 160 minutes long, and could have been shorter, I am glad it wasn’t shortened, because the film was great the way it was. Sure, a few scenes dragged on, but the dialog and acting made those extra minutes worth it.

As well as directing the film, Andrew Dominik adapted the novel by Ron Hansen. I have not read the novel, but I must say that the dialog is some of the best of the year, and possibly the decade. As I stated earlier, great character development made this film seem like it was 90 minutes long, and the multiple stories only made the film more interesting. I must say, I was pleasantly surprised at how big Paul Schneider’s role was, considering he is 10th billed on the cast listing. Well, after this specticle of a film, I now want to see Dominik’s only other writing/directing credit, which is for the film Chopper.

Onto the acting, which really pushed me to see the film, if not for anything else. You’ve got Brad Pitt & Casey Affleck in their most acclaimed performances, as well as a stellar supporting crew to boot. I will just list the best performances because there are just too many to comment on.

Given the time that Zooey Deschanel had, she did do a good job, but if I didn’t look up the cast, I wouldn’t of realized it was her in that role, though she did seem very familiar. She had something like two minutes of screentime (at most), and was very good in both of her scenes, though I found them unnecessary.

Mary-Louise Parker plays Jesse James’ wife “Zee“, in her first theatrical acting performance in a few years. I must say, she didn’t overly impress me with the amount of time she had on the screen. A few good scenes, but overall a typical, bland performance.

Garret Dillahunt plays one of the bandits “Ed Miller“. Now, his performance was good, considering the amount of time he was given, but something really bothered me, and that was he looked too much like Casey Affleck. It only bothered me because I kept getting the two confused until someone said the character’s name. At first glance, I just assumed he was an older version of Robert Ford, which threw me off a few times. If anything, they should’ve casted him in Rockwell’s role.

Sam Rockwell plays “Charley Ford“, and does the role with such diversity it makes me sad that this man is not a more known name in Hollywood. He turns out great performance after great performance, only to be unrecognized because either the film was too small, or because the rest of the cast makes him unnoticed. If it weren’t for Affleck, I would say that Rockwell would have easily slipped into this year’s potential supporting nominees. To be honest, I thought that his character had more to work with than Affleck’s, because his character goes through immense changes in a relatively average amount of time, whereas Affleck’s goes through subtle, but evergrowing changes throughout a large amount of time.

Paul Schneider plays “Dick Liddil“, my personal favourite character of the film. He creates a great performances out of very little to work with. Constantly playing off his co-workers with such poise, it is in my opinion that this man will become a future Oscar nominee in the future. Like Rockwell, he is very underrated, but mainly because a lot of people don’t even see his films. I saw Live Free or Die earlier this year, and he was the best part of that mediocre film, and for that reason alone, people should watch it, to see this young actor bloom.

Now onto the 2 reasons everyone wants to see this film, Pitt & Affleck. These 2 actors played off their counterparts extremely well, and if it weren’t for that I wouldn’t of found anything about their performances that amazing, more so for Pitt.

Brad Pitt plays “Jesse James“, the ruthless gunslinging, backstabbing, trainrobbing vigilante. For the most part, he plays this man very subtly. It isn’t until the last third of the film that he truly transforms into the madman many people thought Jesse James was, which was very, very compelling. Personally, I don’t consider his performance ‘oscar-worthy’, but seeing as it is one of the betters ones of the year, I wouldn’t be disappointed if he was nominated.

Casey Affleck plays “Robert Ford“, one of the most interesting real-life characters in a long time. Again, another very subtle performance, only made better by Affleck’s ability to create such a presence in such a silent way. He does this by adding quirkiness to the role, making him standout a lot more than if he were just hush-hush the entire time. Certainly one of the best performances of the year, whether you consider him leading or supporting.

The technicals of the film were breathtaking. From the ragged, tattered clothing of the traditional western sense, to elegant suits and bodacious dresses. Alike the clothing, the art decoration was setup the same way. With dirty, decrepit shacks that symbolize the carelessness of these ‘thugs’ as one would say, to high class ballrooms, with fancy chandeliers, and gorgeous decor surrounding the already astounding room.

The score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis, who did the score for last year’s western The Proposition, shine yet again with a very touching, as well as menacing score. Though I did appreciate the fact that it was well used at times, I thought that it was used too much throughout the film. The first two times were fine, that made the scenes standout, but after those first few times it was used, it just got annoying. For only this reason, the score lost a lot of merit in my mind.

The best tech of the film was by far the cinematography, done by one of the best cinematographers in cinema today, Roger Deakins, who did just a phenomenal job. There were a lot of beautiful scenes, that may come off as pointless and repetitive, but do have meaning if you look deeper. From the mouthwatering winter sequences, to the eye-widening sky shots, this film was always a treat to look at.

Nominations for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Best Picture
Best Actor in a Supporting Role - Casey Affleck (just for the sake of argument, i’m placing him supporting because i like to keep my nominees to be in the same category as the academy places them)
Best Director - Andrew Dominik
Best Adapted Screenplay - Andrew Dominik
Best Cinematography

Rating : 9/10