Well, I chose The Fisher King because I was browsing the Netflix Robin Williams collection and noticed I hadn't ever watched it. Considering its favorable ratings and awards/nominations, I was pretty surprised I missed it. Glad we remedied that!
Robin Williams was brilliant and it's no wonder why he was nominated for an Academy Award here. This is the kind of role I think he was best at. While there's some seriousness to the film, he really delivers the comedy. That's not to take away from Jeff Bridges, who did fine in the supporting role and was spot on with his deliver. There were a few moments where we had a glimpse what was coming from his as Lebowski. Mercedes Ruehl won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress. I thought she played the character great and compliment Bridges really well in their relationship. I thought Michael Jeter and Tom Waits were outstanding in their minor parts... I didn't even know Waits was in it (apparently, it was uncredited)
Clocking in over 130 minutes, I was prepared for a long and stretched out movie. It was a pleasant surprise that the movie kept a decent pace and had my attention throughout. It had a good beginning with Jack in the studio, setting up his character as a shock jock radio personality that wasn't just playing the part on the air. We knew something was up with that last caller, and I think the scene was set up really well with Jack being as high on himself as anybody could be. I really liked the practicing of the sitcom line he was slated to deliver, 'forgive me!' just before everything came down with the news.
Our introduction to Parry was even better. Forget a gradual lead in to his situation... we're given a full on attack with his mental issues at the forefront... gallantly doing his duty as a knight, saving Jack from the assault and himself. I really liked the way Parry's mind was presented to us. The Red Knight made his fear a priority... it highlighted his issues from the tragedy and made them, along with his quest, as real to us as they were to him. There was a nice lead up to his big confrontation with the incident, and it was a bit of a shock to see the shooting... but I think it really made an impact to see him go through it leading us into the sad moment when he was brutally attacked by the same two guys from earlier, and more so repressed memories.
While we were served up a very convenient and happy ending... I liked it. I liked how Jack went about getting the Holy Grail (and that it was a simple trophy). I thought it was great that they included the line, "thank god nobody looks up in this town" answering any question from the audience of how nobody notices him. We have talked about multiple movies needing lines like thrown in... they're not absolutely necessary, but the add a little bit to the film.
One of the elements I like the most about The Fisher King is the call-backs. The most notable is Pinocchio... especially when Parry calls Jack out on the little lie about his girlfriend. (This also gave us a great, and fitting, joke... Where would King Arthur be without Guinevere?... Happily married, probably) Also, the continual clumsiness of Lydia... from the books, to the dumplings, to the movies and back to the dumplings with Parry. Even little lines such as when Jack sees the red knight on the stained glass window and says, "I'm hearing horses now, Parry would be so pleased..." I just thought it was really well done, and the timing with each was handled nicely. Even the ending an bringing them back to Central Park... It felt complete and right.
I thought there were three scenes that really stood out... two of them really outstanding. One was the office scene with Michael Jeter singing to Lydia. While it wasn't an overly important scene to the movie, it was funny and entertaining and showed Jack's personality changing (smiling in the elevator, noticing himself that he's on on a first name basis with the homeless people) and how much he was looking to get Lydia to notice Parry. Mostly, just a fun scene with the singing. Now, the two best scenes for me were the waltz in Grand Central Station and the first scene in Central Park. The really gave us the best view of Parry, away from his demons. Both scenes were also played perfectly by Williams.
With all that, it wasn't a perfect movie and I have a couple minor gripes. I liked the use of 'Hit the Road Jack' and 'I've Got the Power,' but there were times when the score just didn't do it for me. That's probably more a product of it being out dated, and it wasn't so horrific that it ruined any scene for me... but once or twice I caught myself thinking 'eh' about the music. The other minor problem for me was with the editing/cut choices. A couple scene breaks seemed a little too sharp, but the thing that stuck out to me the most was the dinner scene. I think this was a good scene, that could have been great... even up there with the Central Park and Grand Central station parts. The problem I had was the use of the transition effect. I understand that it was used to show the passage of time, but it felt disconnect from the rest of the film... and it wasn't really the type of montage that called for the distinction. For me, at least, it would have been better with each cut showing us a wide view of the restaurant, more empty each time until we end on the final shot of the scene with the place looking bare other than the seemingly annoyed employees.
Overall, I think it's pretty clear, I absolutely enjoyed The Fisher King. I'm sure there's more I could talk about (including the story of the Fisher King and the portrayal/message of homelessness, perhaps), but I want to wrap this up for now. With my minor complaints, I still loved the movie and it ends up slotting into, I think, the 2nd slot for Robin Williams movies for me, behind Dead Poet's Society and just a head of What Dreams May Come... pulling in a solid A grade. It also provides us with a strong Mediocre Best Actor candidate.
Just commenting, so direct responses to my review can be replied to here, instead of at the end of all the initial reviews.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThat was entertaining.
ReplyDeleteIf you ignore the power point presentation during the dinner scene I thought it was one of the best - adorable and funny. The singing in the office was equally as grand.
The brutality of the gunshot I could have done without - it may give me nightmares. And I thought the ending was a bit too tidy.
I don't have much to add which hasn't already been covered. Really enjoyed this one. A-
Guys, I'm a fair-weather Robin Williams fan. I think all his voices and non sequiters are hacky, and I think a lot of his roles are pure manipulation. I only like him when he's actively dialed himself down to something approaching a recognizable person. My favorite performance of his is World's Greatest Dad, in which he doesn't do a single impression.
ReplyDeleteThe Fisher King is on the big side of his filmography, though he didn't bother me too much here. What did bother me was how little I connected with what was happening onscreen.
The root of this is how consistently unpleasant Jeff Bridges is. He starts as an arrogant asshole and graduates to a self-pitying asshole, followed by a condescending asshole, and wraps it all up by being a self-congratulatory asshole. It would be one thing if the film wasn't on his side, but the score of sad violins tells me otherwise. The impression I took was that director Terry Gilliam wanted me to feel sorry for Bridges, that he's so tortured by 'causing' that killing spree. Anne is there to humanize him, such that I'm supposed to think if she can love him, then surely I can, too, but I never bought the relationship in the first place. Why is she wasting her time with this depressing sack of shit who watches bad TV shows just to feel superior?
Williams is a more interesting, believable character, and he hallucinates. When he's introduced and shortly thereafter, Gilliam films him in angelic light. My initial thought was that if they go down the whimsical route, I'm going to be pissed. Luckily, Gilliam isn't interested in romanticizing homelessness as some kind of freeing adventure. He treats Parry's mental illness extremely seriously in the beginning, which made it all the more frustrating when it goes away as the movie needs it to. What generally bothers me about Williams is slightly dialed back, and the rest is explained by his illness, so I liked him here.
The two female roles are problematic, too. Amanda Plummer as Lydia is pure manic-pixie-dream-girl bullshit. Look how clumsy she is! She can't eat dumplings with those chopsticks! Adorable! Shane mentioned how rude it was when Frances Ha makes the restaurant staff wait for her to get cash. The scene here, in which the entire staff is waiting for them to leave, is ten times worse. It's not cute, it's not funny, it's not romantic. Her whole courtship with Parry is predicated on him stalking her every day, something which she thinks is just so great when he confesses to it. I've already complained about Mercedes Ruehl's character. I don't understand why she's sticking around, and then, for her to just immediately accept Jack's return after he abruptly dumps her earlier makes her a spineless doormat. I was shocked to see that Ruehl won an Oscar for this role. I thought Plummer was much better, which made the ridiculousness of her character so much more frustrating. Lydia's breakdown after Parry confesses his stalking is great, but I can't get into the scene because she should be locking the door behind her as quickly as possible.
One strong bonus point I give Ruehl is that chick was really smoking those cigarettes. That's just something you don't see anymore and ever when you do it's fake. Smoke was billowing out of her even while she was talking showing she was taking some major drags on those squares
DeleteOn the directing, I haven't seen enough Gilliam to make a judgment on him. I love Fear and Loathing, thought 12 Monkeys was strong, and that's it. Brazil feels like a must-see, and I'll get there eventually. His stamp is all over Parry's living space. I think of Gilliam as a sloppier Wes Anderson. The production design is just as meticulously planned and arranged, but Gilliam's sets have a much dirtier, more lived-in feel. He manages to get some great scenes on camera for the Fisher King, particularly the ballroom scene and the fisher king parable (kudos to Williams for that, too). Even the restaurant scene is framed beautifully. My problem is just the tone and the complete lack of buy-in. I was thinking, "This ballroom scene is amazing, except it's based on a mentally ill man stalking a woman through a train station, and played as a grand romance." Some tricks Gilliam uses bug me, too. Dutch angles and fisheye lenses exist beyond symbolism, such that their use only means one thing. It's directorial telling-not-showing, and I roll my eyes every time the frame starts tilting.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty down on the Fisher King. I try to keep a chain on my cynicism, but it still has some reach. I think the fisher king speech is a legitimately great scene, and there's enough stuff to be able to say I liked it overall. The depiction of Parry's PTSD as a nightmare horseman was a nice touch and Gilliam keeps things interesting, but I don't buy the key relationships and Bridges is a dud of a lead. I'm at a C.
I don’t know how to feel about The Fisher King. Unlike quite a few of the movies we’ve watched, I do feel like I enjoyed the experience of watching the movie moreso than something like Taxi Driver or Holy Motors. It was technically great as well, with Terry Gilliam doing a fantastic job. However, many of the plot points felt jammed in and unearned, resulting a movie I’ve grown a little more annoyed with as it sits with me.
ReplyDeleteThe heart of this movie felt like four relationships: Jack & Parry, Jack & Anne, Jack & himself, and Parry & Himself. Three of them work for me and one doesn’t. Let’s go best to worst.
The Jack & Parry relationship is, not surprisingly, fantastic. Jeff Bridges is always great, and Robin Williams is in a role he was just meant to play. It’s a little weird in hindsight how MUCH he really fit the bill, but I digress. You can’t help but root for Parry to return to a sense of normalcy, leading us to also root for a guy who is a real jerk. I also liked the curveball that closed the redemption story, with Parry being the “Fisher King” and Jack being the “Fool” by getting the cup and allowing Parry to let go of his past.
The internal struggle of Parry is also done extremely well. Did anyone else feel like the Red Knight was a personification of the shotgun blast, or was that just me? Like others have mentioned, the mental stability of Parry was treated well, not too often played for pure comedic effect. We really see many of Williams’ other great characters in this performance.
I felt like the Jack vs. Himself dynamic was the real driver of the story. Drunk and crazy Jack at the beginning was a great showoff of Terry Gilliam the director. There were some nice shots to give that drunken effect that worked very well – sorry, I liked the fish-eye lense there. Beyond that early setup, we get a better idea of what Jack is looking for out of all of his time with Parry. I loved his off-hand mention of just wanting to pay his fine and get on with his life. Jack wound up treating Parry like his “fine” at first, setting him up with District 3’s top female tribute, Lydia. I was good with everything up until the Lydia date for the most part, with the exception of a couple small parts which I’ll get to in a minute. After the Lydia date, the movie almost entirely falls apart for me.
Let’s start with the Jack & Anne storyline. I’m in agreement with Kissel here. It was completely pointless and there just to give Jack some extra redemption the movie doesn’t even try to earn. Why is this storyline there at all? What change does he make that suggests he would go back to Anne at the end? At what point do I ever feel like these are two people who cared about each other at some point? Was I the only one wildly angered when Anne just accepted him coming back at the end? Make Anne Jack’s sister or just random friend and the movie loses nothing but a slammed-in rom-com subplot. Mrs. Chase won an academy award for this role?!?! Weak year.
The other part of the movie I could have done without was the plight of the homeless subplot. This wasn’t a social commentary like Boyz In the Hood – this was a story of redemption for two men. Why was there a need for some kind of social commentary? While I did love the line by the old war vet – “They pay so they don’t have to look” – it all felt a little hamfisted. This also led to the big change in Jack with the show pitch, but again, couldn’t we have thought of a better way to handle that?
So we end up with a great core movie that has a large number of superfluous subplots and a crappy ending. Hmmm. Those sort of things would be a little more forgivable if we didn’t have a 132 minute runtime. I loved the main story, Bridges and Williams were great, but the dumb subplots and ending torpedo what should have been a very good movie.
ReplyDelete+ Great performances by Bridges and Williams
+ Gilliam does a good job with some cool shots
+ Redemption story of Parry done very well
- Needless romantic subplot for Jack
- Needless social commentary
- Jack’s full redemption feels hamfisted and unearned
Grade: B-
I don't actually think Jack is fully redeemed... he may feel like it, and for some fleeting moments he may be... but anybody who isn't completely gullible enough to buy it, knows better... and those who are so, can live happily ever after with an ending like this. I still assume he'll be a shitty boyfriend at times, or all of the time.. .and still be an asshole in general to people... but perhaps he's made a little progress.
DeleteAnd I don't get why a bit of social commentary is a bad thing... and I don't think it was strong enough or over the top enough to be a negative.
I always get in trouble with you all for pushing my own thoughts on what's happening behind the scenes, so I'm gonna do it here. Where in that ending is Jack not portrayed as fully redeemed? Maybe you're right that he'll be a shithead at times, but nothing post-Grail suggests that will be the case.
DeleteA bit of social commentary is fine, but when the movie is already 132 freaking minutes and 20 of those are jammed in commentary that are only tangentally connected to the main plot, I'm going to doc it a little bit. FWIW, that was my most minor complaint.
I think everything Jack did... was still selfish, especially going back to Anne.
DeleteJack started off a completely asshole.. on the air and off, then became broken in his own self asshole pity, thought he could give Parry money to make up for his wrongdoing, then saw that there was something Parry wanted (Lydia) and tried to help with that, but eventually saw what Parry needed (the Grail). So while he was somewhat redeemed, I don't think it was for Parry, but still for himself... for his own guilt. But there was still progression within that redemption. Frances Ha went 90% of the movie with no progress at all, and jumped to what looked like the good life. That felt more unearned. There isn't too much after the Grail.. but the big one is when Jack goes back to Anne, that's complete selfishness... so while he make make some efforts along the way, it'll mostly be for himself, and laying there in the grass didn't make him any less of an asshole... just a naked one. For me, the movie just happened to end on one of his higher moments, but he is unlikely to stay there.
To begin with, I had never heard of The Fisher King. Not the parable or the movie. So I had no expectations coming in to this movie. I used to like Robin Williams, but then I started growing up and found him childish. Then I actually grew up and appreciated his work in a new light, though some of it does nothing for me (as much as I enjoy Hook, his performance is a bit flat when he’s not acting like Robin Williams).
ReplyDeleteSo does Williams deliver here? I think he does, though he’s not the star in this movie. Williams gets to be Williams for this entire flick. When he’s happy, he’s way up there. When he’s nervous, he’s vibrating with anxiety. When he’s scared, he’s all in. Because Williams is playing a manic person suffering from PTSD, his insanity makes sense. Him running from the knight was a great touch. I just can’t criticize this character, though if anyone thinks he’s anyhow cured in the end, they’re dead wrong.
The Bridges character was harder to get behind. I kept waiting to want to root for him since he was supposed to be the good guy. But he remains insufferably arrogant throughout. Even when he helps Williams, he does some egotistical quest to help himself. He really thinks the universe is against him. There was never a moment I wanted his character to succeed, even if I wanted Parry to get better. This would be fine if it wasn’t clear that the director -wanted- us to root for him. That’s a failure. Bridges, however, does fine in this role. Though, it’s pretty clear that slick and extremely determined aren’t his strong points as an actor because he’s just too likable. Maybe the director though innate Bridges’ likability would save this character. But even Bridges can’t convince me to like this self-righteous schmuck.
This brings me to a tangent. We’ve heard of white guilt, white privilege, etc. A lot of people who are saying these things are white people who are helping out black people, right? They fail to realize that what they’re doing and saying is condescending. Yeah, I’m here to help out these black people. Look how great I am. Fucking insufferable Liberals. Always a martyr. This is the exact thinking Bridges’ character falls in to. He thinks he’s better somehow because he fixed Williams by giving him someone to love. Never mind that Williams is still severely mentally ill and that he really hasn’t fixed him. He just gave him something that he thought Williams should have, not something he needed per se. It’s like he sees the villagers starving and they say, “We’re out of bread!” Jacks response is, “Well, eat some cake,” believing that he’s actually helping.
I thought the Lydia character was a bit inconsistent. She’s repressed, but perfectly expressive at the right times. And when she sheds her repression, she does it with fun gusto. It just made no sense to me. It’s bringing me back to the annoying “this quirky person is a savant deep down!” It’s about my least favorite gimmick in movies. Amanda Plummer did nail it for the most part. I have no complaints.
ReplyDeleteThis brings us to Mercedes Rheul. I’d never heard of her before. I thought she did a great job in the role and that her character, who obviously has daddy issues, made sense as well. Of course she forgave him. She’s desperate. Just like she forgave him a million times before. It’s not surprising that a narcissist like Jack would end up with her. If the director wants us to think this is the last time Jack will disappoint her, then that’s a failure. It seems like he wanted to say this, but I’m not certain. While she did excellent, I’m shocked it nabbed her an Oscar.
Neither female character ultimately had much substance as their entire existence was centered around providing for men. Just throwing it out there.
MICHAEL JETER OWNED THAT CHARACTER AND THAT DANCE WAS AWESOME.
Can the punk kids be nominated for most generic bad guys?
For the most part, the plot was interesting. They lost me a bit at trying to get the grail, but it kept me involved. The scene in the park where Williams is nude was pretty damn interesting. I like how they spliced in the Knight in the middle of the city. (I thought it was implausible that the punks found them twice though.) I can’t recall any of the camera work or other technical works sticking out too much though.
One thing I did notice was repetition. The same songs. The same sitcom. I’ve Got the Power seemed like an incredibly odd choice for this movie and distracted me. It just didn’t match the tone. I guess the sitcom is to demonstrate how shallow the TV world is or something? Seemed like an odd thing that didn’t add anything to the movie but a couple of attempts at cheap laughs.
To reflect on Kissel’s thoughts on mental illness, I think they nail a lot of it in the beginning. He’s crazy, but he can survive. He’s homeless, but there’s still something there so he can survive on his own just fine. It’s a pretty honest look at mental illness. There is no judgment. I too was afraid that this would largely turn into a “maybe crazy is the real normal” type thing where Williams is a philosophical savant. So glad it didn’t go there.
But then that ending happens. What. The. Fuck. I don’t even know what happened. Is Williams mostly cured now? When he and Bridges are naked in the park, do we have our crazy is the new normal moment? Any good will towards treating mental illness seriously is thrown out the door when the entire wing of a mental hospital is singing and dancing like crazy people. Just horrible.
This could have been a unique flick. It could have been a solid Robin Williams vehicle, but it just couldn’t tie itself together. Good God, the ending was bad. C+
When I read your reviews, the grade never seems to match the tone.
DeleteI think my current job training requires me to be hyper critical. I'm used to writing to tear down something more than to prop something up at this point. I guess I'm assuming I come across more negative than my grades.
DeleteYou tore apart Frances Ha, gave it a decent grade. Praised Fisher King, gave it a bad grade.
DeleteThe Fisher King had stuff worthy of praise, but had such a bad finish that I couldn't go any higher. There are different variances of flaws, some fatal. Not being able to finish a movie can really damage it. Happy for happy's sake is one of the worst.
DeleteFrances Ha suffered from the same flaw of questionable ending, but it was one of wrapping up too quickly. The ending still made sense. The Fisher King ending was just ridiculous.
Also, there are movies that I don't like that might get better grades. We're talking about objective things. Gerwig in Frances Ha nails her role. Bridges is flat. When we're talking main characters, that's a big deal.
Looking back at my Frances Ha review, I write in the second paragraph that its a goodish movie, though. Most of the negatives are ripping hipster culture, not the movie itself.
I'm going to forget this, so I'll post it now for discussion later. A lot of you mention "the director tried to get me to ..."
ReplyDeleteI don't understand this argument. How do we know what the director was trying to do? Have you heard a podcast or interview asking him/her? Curious as to your thoughts...
When the director plays sad music, it's usually to enhance what is supposed to be a sad scene. That's what the director wants you to feel. If there is no purpose behind what the director is doing, then it's a waste. Why put it in there? Good films don't waste time.
DeleteIf you spend enough time in Mexico, you're going to learn Spanish through osmosis. The same is true for film language. The way things are shot, the inflection in a line, the score, the edits, it's all communicating something on top of what's happening.
DeleteFor most movies, what's onscreen is exactly what the director wanted, so he/she is responsible for the language. Every prop, every music choice, every performance, every costume. It's all there on purpose. No, I haven't read any interviews from Gilliam, but I can make educated guesses based on what's onscreen. In the Fisher King, Gilliam uses repetitive shots to illustrate how characters are viewing others. When Jack is about to get lit on fire, Parry gets introduced with light behind him, implying that he's Jack's guardian angel in that moment. When the shoe's on the other foot and Parry ends up in the same spot, the same bum-beating assholes show up with the same light behind them, because they are about to become Parry's twisted guardian angels by giving him what he wants.
Film language also tells the viewer where the director wants sympathy to go. Jack gets the benefit of sad music behind him during his early breakdown. Gilliam could've put any music he wanted behind him, but he want with plaintive violins. The viewer can take this in any way he wants, but the music means that Gilliam has one way in mind.
I talked about the restaurant scene already, but that's another example of using film language to get a point across. Gilliam holds the table in the center of the frame and fills it with only the table, because for Parry and whats-her-face, nothing else in the world matters at that moment.
The flipside of this is the Death of the Author, which is a whole nother discussion.
It's been mentioned before but movies that conveniently have a happy ending when there is no chance in hell that a happy ending would come from the closest plausible real life scenario always bugs me. 2 major things that needed changed to make it a better movie for me
ReplyDelete1-The Parry-Lydia relationship needs to go. Her purpose was only to make us extra sad that Parry gets attacked and reverts back into his catatonic state. As Kissel mentioned, relationships based on stalking rarely work out well. The fact that she was even in that situation- a random phone call wins a membership to a movie rental store- she not only buys it but doesn't recognize that Anne is being a super bitch in the store then decides its a good idea to spend an evening with these total strangers who are unwashed battered and bruised. They could have Parry save her from being mugged or find her purse after she misplaced it and left it behind and she could thank him and pay him a compliment about his kindness and it would've had the same effect on him- keep in mind he is an insane stalker who is in love with a total stranger- her acknowledgement would mean the world to him. But by making her fall for him to after 1 date and an admission of stalking is too much, plus we'd save ourselves 20 minutes or more of runtime.
2-Parry's suddenly cured from by the Grail. Again, happy ending just to have a happy ending. Parry shouldn't have survived the attack and Jack should've completed his quest for the Grail out of grief and upon completion they could show him in a new radio role offering helpful advice instead of the same shock-jock crap from the beginning. That could be the final impetus for change a few of you are asking for, the reason he realizes he needs to be with Anne. Yea the movie would be sadder but it'd be more meaningful for me at least.
I agree with Kissel in that I've always thought Williams' best roles are much more subdued. He was a talented actor that too often played the clown. At least this role called for it and was my favorite for him in the manic/character category of his performances.
I knew this movie had some award buzz but didn't know how much or who won or was nominated, but the whole time I was wondering if Mercedes Rheul was one included because she reminded me so much of Marissa Tomei's character in My Cousin Vinny. Strong ballbusting ultra New York girl in love with a flawed man who couldn't pull off his greatest feats without her. Vinny needed someone to testify about positraction and Jack needed the weird scenario double date. Of course since Jack pulled off the heist by himself Mercedes probably shouldn't just gotten the nomination instead of the win. It was a weak year in the category as she beat out Dianne Ladd in Rambling Rose, Juliette Lewis in Cape Fear, Kate Nelligan in Prince of Tides, and Jessica Tandy in Fried Green Tomatoes. I'll assume the Academy thought they'd get more chances with a young Juliette Lewis.
Overall, some great scenes but enough problems weighing it down. I did love the Grand Central waltz scene- I actually preferred that the extras weren't professional dancers and most were bad dancers and you could catch some of them glancing at the camera. I wish Netflix let me give half stars because 2/5 is too low for something with so much going for it but 3/5 feels too strong. C+, should've been higher.
Since we are now in free-for-all... I hate to call out one person specifically, but Bobby...
ReplyDelete"With my minor complaints, I still loved the movie and it ends up slotting into, I think, the 2nd slot for Robin Williams movies for me, behind Dead Poet's Society and just a head of What Dreams May Come... pulling in a solid A grade."
So your ranking of Robin Williams' movies goes:
1) Dead Poets Society
2) The Fisher King
3) What Dreams May Come
And doesn't include, oh I don't know, Good Will Hunting? Or are we talking lead roles only here? I know there are a handful of people out there who defend What Dreams May Come, but come on.
Side note: I know Williams was nominated for "best actor" here, but Jeff Bridges was the lead of this movie, yes? Am I missing something here?
There aren't any rules about Lead and Supporting. People can pretty much submit however they want. I'd bet Bridges and Williams both submitted as Leads.
DeleteNo, i just forgot Good Will Hunting at the time I posted it review, which was nearly 4 am, so I was a whee bit tired. A quick look at the spreadsheet, if you were that concerned, would have showed you that Good Will Hunting holds an A for me, and, yeah... it would be firmly placed in 2nd. What Dreams May Come borders on that A grade for me...
DeleteI typically enjoy Robin Williams films, despite flops like Popeye and Toys, because he is entertaining. The guy knows how to deliver and as Shane pointed out, he did so here. For me, Williams' best is Dead Poet's Society as it inspiring in so many ways. The Fisher King is probably his fifth best performance.
ReplyDeleteLet me tell you what I liked for there were a few. First of all, the acting was great. Jeff Bridges is one of the better actors in Hollywood but he would not be able to carry the film without Williams. The chemistry they shared was spot on throughout the film.
Second of all, Jack's emotion as he attempts to wrestle with his influence over Parry's wife's killer. We can see the sheer horror in his eyes when he learns about what happened and then we see his inability to put it behind him. I would probably be in the same boat as Jack if that happened to me (in some way) but his ability to show how much it bothers him was fantastic.
Third of all, Robin Williams was great. He made the movie. His energy should leave the viewer in awe of his talent.
What I did not like, however, was the predictable/hokey scenes toward the end. When Jack returns to Anne and they talk only for them to do it in her office after they make the movies fall. Yeah, that was lame because it was unnecessary.
Then, what was the point of the fireworks at the end? I'm sorry but that was really stupid. Too much of a Mario Kart ending that ruined a good film.
I liked The Fisher King but failed to fall in love with it.
Grade: B-
P.S. Am I the only one who thought Jeff Bridges looked like Jason David Franck from the Power Rangers when looking at the cover picture? Maybe I was.
"For me, Williams' best is Dead Poet's Society as it inspiring in so many ways."
DeleteDid you watch for the first time before you turned 21? I haven't seen it, but I've heard it's wildly melodramatic and really only affecting to adolescents. Sounds like a movie you have to catch at the right time in your life.
Sounds like a movie you need to watch before you judge it! But, you already have that notion implanted, so I'm skeptical on you giving it a real fair shot now!
DeleteI'm with Phil on this one. I saw Dead Poet's Society in high school, thought it was good if a little corny at the time. I'd be shocked if I thought better of it 15 years later.
DeleteI've seen it again this year, still loved it. I don't really ever find inspiration from movies, so I can't really comment on that aspect of it.
DeleteAnd the only way for you to find out, is watching it again!
We need to talk about this whole ending to movies thing and what effect it can have. I can't stand cheesy endings, but I feel we may be overreacting to a bad 5 minutes. And sometimes life does work out ok, is that so bad? Does that make it an non movieworthy story?
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with happy endings, I have a problem when you make a movie about mental illness and do all the necessary work to build that world you ruin all credibility you have created by making him not only suddenly cured but also give him the ability to turn the rest of the asylum into a choir overnight does a minimum full letter grade damage for me
DeleteI'm fine with happy endings in general (see my Frances Ha review again if you don't believe me). This one, however, was very unearned. In no logical world do Jack and Anne get back together that neatly. There's no reason the homeless pitch should have sent Jack back to Parry either. The whole thing just felt tacked on and silly.
DeleteI actually bought Parry being cured by the cup more than anything else in the end. The actual tale of the Fisher King set the cup up to eventually have some sort of magical curative powers, even if that curing function was only in Parry's mind (a placebo effect if you will).
I think in nearly every logical world, Jack and Anne get back together.. relationships like that happen time and time again.
DeleteBut, logic also tells us, that it will still be a pretty shitty relationship at times, if not most of the time. Just because it ended on a high note for them, doesn't mean it stays that way.
DeleteI must have misunderstood the passage of time, I often watch these when I'm very tired. Was it literally overnight?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. It felt to me like it could have been months later. Movies that have obscure passage of time generally annoy me.
DeleteDidn't Frances Ha have some kind of obscure passage of time? :-p
DeletePhil, I watched Dead Poet's Society for the first time three years ago. I thought it was great then, as I do now.
ReplyDelete