Advertisement
Advertisement
HOT TOPICS



Advertisement
NOW PLAYING

in theaters



review index

new on DVD/BluRay

Welcome

The Film Experience™ was created by Nathaniel R


 Gemini, Cinephile, Actressexual. Also loves cats. All material herein is written and copyrighted by him, unless otherwise noted. twitter | facebook | pinterest | tumblr | letterboxd

 

Powered by Squarespace
What'cha Looking For?
Comment Fun

COMMENT DU JOUR
Love Affair (1994) - as "A Year With Kate" nears its conclusion

A YEAR WITH KATE... 2 episodes left

 "A really beautiful look into the careers of one of my favorite actors, but it's made me consider the careers of so many different actors and how the great ones adapt to eras while still staying true to themselves. This is a special, lovely series. I both cannot wait for and am so sad for the end next week.-John T

 

Beauty vs. Beast

Rhett is all "as if i could lose this poll" - Have you voted?

Keep TFE Strong

Your suscription dimes make an enormous difference to The Film Experience in terms of stability and budget to dream bigger. Consider...

I ♥ The Film Experience

THANKS IN ADVANCE

For those who can't commit to a dime a day, consider a one time donation for an article or a series you are glad you didn't have to live without.

Subscribe
« Visual Index ~ Summertime (1955) | Main | Yes, No, Maybe So: The Butler »
Friday
May102013

Yes, No, Maybe So: "August: Osage County"

Oscar-teasing trailers are just like Oscar bait movies: they all come out at the same time. Can't there be a little breathing room? After Captain Phillips warned us that Tom Hanks (and Paul Greengrass) are ready to come roaring back... After Gravity teased us with visual effects so terrifying that the prospect of Sandra Bullock acting out existential despair (not something she's known for you must admit) already seems like The Must Event of the Year... After The Butler threw a Handful of Presidents & First Ladies , Oscar Winners, Ten History Lessons, and OpPRRRrraaAAHHHh in one trailer pot and stirred itself into an Oscar Bait Frenzy (or Parody)... came The Weinstein Co's major player: AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY.

The film stars 3 Oscar winners (Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Chris Cooper), 3 nominees (Juliette Lewis, Sam Shepard, Abigail Breslin), 1 underappreciated awesome fellow (Ewan McGregor), 1 recent Emmy winner (Martindale), 1 rising star Benedict Cumberbatch, 1 curiously resurgent Dermot Mulroney and 1 Misty Upham from Frozen River... so you know FYC ads will have to be five page spreads. The Hollywood Reporter's already counting the ad dollars because that's a lot of names to push. [more after the jump]

If you've been reading The Film Experience faithfully you know that I'm a huge fan of Tracy Letts (see his plays first chance you get!) and that I found this particular play just riveting and sublime on Broadway.  But what of the trailer? Let's break it down...

YES

Is anybody S'POSED to smoke?!" 

  • Meryl Streep's fourth Oscar? I wanna be there for that if/when it happens!
  • The source material is just masterful and gripping with killer dialogue and at least a couple of moments which arrive with true seismic force. It's tough to shake when it's directed and acted well.
  • Familial dramas that people actually feel excited about are in short supply in our comic-book world so we'd have to support this even if we didn't already love the play.
  • George Clooney & Grant Henslov and Jean Doumanian, just a few of the producers, regularly shepherd quality films for adults into the multiplexes
  • "Is anybody supposed to smoke" is a great line reading from Meryl -- and her character Violet Weston has plenty of funny/bitchy lines in the play -- and as per usual her chameleonic skills are in ample evidence despite this very brief peek. At least we get a taste of the voice choices: throaty, lower, and sardonic...

NO

Little Abigail aside this is such a 90s Flavored Cast, yes?

  • Meryl Streep's fourth Oscar? If it happens so soon after snatching Viola's away and she's anything less than absolutely worthy it might be rough-going on Oscar blogs and forums all season
  • Benedict Cumberbatch's big moment looks a little bit like SELF-CONSCIOUSLY BIG OSCAR CLIP out of context. I'm not sure it's that flattering in the generally light tone the trailer has gone for but I'll admit I didn't much care for "Little Charles" in the stage show either.
  • Now, I don't want them to give away the best moments or anything but the trailer does seem curiously lacking in any specific hook to watch it beyond its list of heavyweight actors...
  • ...though "heavyweight" is a generous term since one could argue that this cast-list veritably screams 'Mid 90s Production!' ...and here we are in 2013.
  • There's nothing particularly delicious or interesting or even moving about the images and very very brief snippets we're shown here. It feels like you could have just skimmed the future DVD and taken lines out at random. As a trailer, it has very little in the way of "shape" or style. Will the movie also feel haphazard?
  • We get only one real undistinguishing shot of the house and the house COULD be a great character in the movie as it is on the stage. But if I know modern non-auteur directors the whole movie will be shot in closeup and we'll miss the chance to really understand this as a home where multiple vivid characters have shared the same oxygen and painful history.
  • But mostly, I thought John Wells didn't show much promise at all as a director in Company Man. I don't mean to be rude but what the hell did he do to deserve this big of a get for his second feature? You'd think the biggest name directors in the world would've wanted it.

MAYBE SO


  • Meryl Streep's fourth Oscar? We can't wait to judge whether or not she's worthy... that's half the fun of Oscar-watching
  • Listen, I have a bad memory for details of movies and plays if I haven't seen them recently and curiously very few specific moments from the play sprang back into my mind while watching this trailer. I wonder how faithful it is? I worry that's it's too faithful (different mediums need different things, as Tim was just reminding us with Gatsby)
  • I feel bad for Julianne Nicholson who doesn't get a title card despite being in a lot of clips and Misty Upham who I don't think we see at all! Also bereft of title cards: Benedict & Margo
  • I've never been entirely crazy about the casting of this movie -- as great as Margot Martindale sometimes is, she's also very expected... she's at the exact point in her career where she'd be the person you'd cast for this. But I realize this is also just me having trouble letting go of my dream cast. I so badly wanted someone to give Kathleen Turner a comeback shot and she would've been so perfect for that role. I wanted Laura Linney for Julia's role. Etcetera. Which is a long way of saying...
  • Regardless of how famous the cast is and how great the play is, the success of this artistically will entirely depend on the execution, the chemistry, and the choices in direction and screenwriting and we can't truly know any of that from a 2 minute trailer. I wish them all the best of luck because I hope this is great great great.

And here's the trailer on the off chance you haven't yet watched it three times (or would like to see it for a fourth):

If I know the TFE crowd well, you're already a yes. As am I even if it's terrible. But I can't say that if I wasn't already attached that this trailer would've sold me on it as a must-see. So are you a Yes, No or Maybe So when it comes to the individual players? Break it down for us in the comments.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (72)

I'm obviously a yes, but, I have to say, I'm not wild about Meryl in the trailer. Of course it's impossible to really tell from a trailer, but she seems to be playing it exactly the way you would expect her to be playing it. Do you know what I mean? It's not really her fault. Obviously the powers that he hired her to do what she does, but it does make me wish they had been a little more creative in their casting .... Of course, here I am doubting Streep, and I'm sure I'll be eating my words in a few months.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterWill h

I'm a hard-core YES, but that trailer is SUCH a Maybe So that I'm even more fearful than ever before that Hollywood has screwed this up.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterdenny

AND!

It sure looks like Meryl has gotten some mileage out of her Ethel Rosenberg wig from Angels In America for this one, no?

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterdenny

I saw the play twice with Estelle Parsons. Meryl is bad. Is she trying to be Richard Nixon with that phony voice? Stunt casting.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterElle

I'm a YES, definitely, but this trailer does not sell the film well. or honestly I believe. it reads 'uplifting', and that's not the case with this story, right?

off-topic: "smash" is officially cancelled. can't say I'm sad, even though I love the show, because I'm not sure it could be fixed the way it should be. I'll miss hilty :(, but she deserves way better and I'm altruistic enough to wish her out of this show that does not explore her full potential.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commentermarcelo

She seems a bit hammy in the trailer, but I'm obviously a YES for this cast and script. Interested to see how this turns out, even though the trailer looks pretty basic.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterPhilip H.

Yes Meryl 's 4th Oscar!

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMark

This trailer in combination with odd "The Butler" trailer are throwing me. It's as if Harvey W. yelled out ... "Get me trailers now to show by Gatsby's bigger than expected opening, or else!" Maybe Nicole Kidman is telling him to release bad trailers, so she'll look better than Meryl, Julia and Oprah in her Oscar bait, "Grace of Monaco," which has yet to show a trailer? Maybe it's a marketing scheme? Show sunlight and then show a darker, more coherent trailer next? I would have shown one good scene. Is that so hard to ask for? That's all.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJonah

I'm a yes, although this trailer is classic, by the books Oscar pic bait (the 90's comparison is apt). I'm remaining optimistic since Tracy Letts adapted his stage play for the screen and I hope the ugly, dark themes still remain in tact. The cast seems solid, although Julia seems a bit off here, which is troubling. I hope I'm wrong.

And I'm excited to see Margo Martindale in (finally!) a big screen role worthy of her talents. This role could've so easily gone to someone like Kathy Bates or Melissa Leo so I think it's refreshing to see a veteran TV actress finally get her due.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAaron

Honestly I don't know much about the play and I've only read about it here so I have no reference point. The trailer is very vague and doesn't make the story very appealing, but I'm a YES on the strength of the cast alone.

There seems to be some interesting stylistic choices, and they don't seem to be rushing through it - the scenes feel well-paced. MVP for me is Meryl - again, I'm blown away by her ability to transform even when I've come to expect it.

I got a big serving of nothing out of Julia; I'm really hoping the character builds in the movie so I don't have to be underwhelmed again. Julianne Nicholson was another stand-out for me.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterG.ShaQ

I'm getting a big "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood" vibe. Not a good thing.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterBenny

Put me in the "Meryl seems to be hamming it up" group. I'd go so far as to argue that everyone else in this trailer seems to be playing it really genuinely and that she sticks out like a sore thumb.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterEvan

Let the campaigning begin. That TWC logo is starting to make me ill, like it's from the hand of God or...

...something Pavlov might have come up with.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterPam

I'm with Elle -- after seeing Estelle Parsons do it live, I don't think Meryl can live up to the role in my mind.

And there's a phrase I never thought I'd say. Who knew that Estelle Parsons (!) was such a heavyweight?

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJames

Mediocre trailer = lack of hype = very good for the film in the long run awards-wise. I feel like Harvey's trying to get it out of that infamous "early frontrunner" slot and playing the long game instead.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterChris

I'm a YES and even though I agree the trailer looks like an Oscar-bait trailer (which I'll admit, I'm often a sucker for) I recognized quite a few of the lines from the stage play and I'm interested in how they've opened up the world of the play. There are so many exterior shots, so I'm interested in seeing how they opened this up to make it more cinematic. Also, I'm liking what I see of Meryl. As much as I loved Estelle Parsons in the play, I don't think that performance would have worked on film. It's extremely over-the-top and I like that Meryl is toning it down and I'm sure she'll find more subtle ways of creating the same effect. I'm also liking what I see of Abigail Breslin, particularly how grown-up she looks.

Also, I know I bring this up every time we talk about this movie, but seriously Nat, I'm getting a little sick of you talking about John Wells as if he were just a fresh-faced rookie. Yes, it's only his second film, but the guy is a TV veteran and he directed some of the best episodes of ER, a lot of which I can see why he was considered for this material. There's a great Breakfast-Club-type episode that he directed that shows how good he is trapping characters in small rooms and having them feel sophocated, but he also wrote and directed the heartbreaking On the Beach (Dr. Greene's death episode, if anyone remembers). He also directed Such Sweet Sorrow (Carol Hathaway's last episode on the show) and he was one of the executive producers from the very beginning, and the fact that George Clooney is one of the producers of this film might explain why John Wells was considered and eventually hired for this (Clooney got his big break on ER, so they workedtogether for nearly 5 years on that show). My point is, yes, maybe there will be a lot of close-ups and maybe Wells is better on television than film, but we should at least acknowledge that the guy has been working in the entertainment medium for over 20 years.....

I'm definitely seeing this because I loved the play and I'm curious to see what they did with it. I also want to see how well it works on screen....

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterRichter Scale

I'm a yes. I have an undeniable need to see Julia Roberts yell "eat the fish, bitch!" onscreen.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoe K

Okay. Surely even the people who invest Streep with Kim-Jong-Il level worship can pick up on the fact that the voice she's putting on here would only be appropriate on SNL? It's possible the trailer just picks out her worst moments (it certainly goes out of its way to pick out the blandest moments from a play which, from memory, has no bland moments). But this is not a promising glimpse.

Even more worryingly, Julia Roberts looks far too airbrushed for that role - Barbara Weston is not a character that should look like she travels with a personal stylist. Also - even though admittedly the trailer foregrounds the play's more muted moments - Roberts completely lacks the open-wound acidic edge you need for this material. Isn't Barbara someone who is barely holding herself together?

When the casting was announced, I was worried Roberts might be out of her depth here (in a way she kinda-sorta-but-not-as-jarringly was in Closer). But I was also thinking I haven't seen her tackle any weighty material in a while and she could have conceivably aged and matured and evolved as an actress in the meantime. This snippet offers no trace of maturity or evolution or even aging. She has always been a radiant woman - and that's part of her charm. But Barbara Weston is not only not radiant, she is the polar opposite. It completely unbalances the play if she looks like Julia Roberts circa 1997 (I swear this woman has. not. aged.)

At least Juliette Lewis looks extremely well cast and Julianne Nicholson might be too. I've always felt she is an actress with unexplored potential. And of course Margot Martindale and Chris Cooper are fabulous. (And Cumberbatch didn't bug me at all - he looks like he is genuinely inhabiting that Weston-family world.)

But none of that matters at all if Streep and Roberts just go ahead and unbalance the whole thing through over- and under-acting respectively.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commentergoran

I was underwhelmed by the play (Estelle Parsons in Boston). As a Streep fan, I really hope this film works out.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterbrandz

Some random thoughts.

Is it odd that I think it seems too bright? As in literally too much light. I want shadows and silhouettes. I guess that would be too stagey and expected.

I would have gone with one continous dinner scene with all the characters present and have that be the trailer. Because the back and forth between these characters is enough to sell the movie. Or maybe the build up to the dinner with everyone talking and meeting up in the dining room. I think Violet/Meryl is the last to appear and takes her place at the head of the table. (I need to go back to my copy of the play.)

Meryl has to kill this role, right? This is her Martha (Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?) or Blanche duBois (A Streetcar Named Desire). She has to know that. I kind of think Roberts will actually deliver. People are talking about Meryl's voice, but I think it makes sense for an older heavily medicated smoker. Didn't get enough of Margo. Cumberbatch in this role reads like a Michael Shannon "Revolutionary Road" type of nomination.

Spoilery: If Letts has to cut something for time, what would that be? Would it be the Breslin/Mulroney or Cumberbatch/Nicholson storyline?

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterRene

I agree on the talent imbalance. And I hate to say it but marketing companies often pick the Ham scenes for trailers. Like the Oprah slap in The Butler, which is now being moved to August, audiences get imprinted just like a commercial for food (and trailers sell food).

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJonah

I do hope the final film is entertaining—if not as artistically satisfying as it could be with a different director at the helm / producing team and ensemble.
The Meryl Streep performances I tent to champion are often the ones her fans are embarrassed by or don't particular care for. She should have won her 3rd for Julie and Julia—although Doubt is a terrible performance I can see the fun she had in playing it as go for broke. My favorite 80's performance from her is Ironweed. Its position in the Oscar race was category fraud.
I wouldn't mind if this was pushed up—I kind of what to watch it now outside the thick of award season politics.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered Commenter3rtful

This movie looks absolutly fabulous. I see a lot of complaining about Streep's voice. I think it is dead on for the role. Older, smoker. What I picked up on and thought as fabulous about her voice and accent in this is that I think Streep sounds exactly like Margo Martindale. Love it! I am very excited about this and I hope Streep wins her 4th Oscar for this movie. Too many people making negative comments that it will be a bad movie just based off a trailer. Give it a chance people. Looks great to me. Other trailers will come out later.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMary

I'm an absolute yes for this, I think the trailer doesn't translate at all how good the movie probably is, so I'll stay hopeful about this one until the movie is out and proves me wrong (which I doubt) btw love everything Meryl does here, especially the deeper voice and accent, can totally picture Violet's bitterness on her.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMatt

I hope the Weinstein Company, Heslov, and Clooney had a cut of the trailer in fearing the play's actual content is a tough sell. Because this cut of the movie is nothing like the play.

In the casting Julia looks dressed down, Ewan looks bookish, Meryl looks like Margo's twin and not necessarily an ill woman, and Dermot Murloney looks textbook predator. The rest of the cast I can easily envision being the Weston-Fordham clan.

Of the main cast featured, I would actually say Julia Roberts comes closest to her character. Then again not a whole lot is revealed for any of these characters that if I tell anybody the first act, almost none of it aside from family coming together is seen in the trailer.

In conclusion, this is an odd way of showing a lot of things (namely jumping out of the gate that an A-list cast and celebrated play with a text card of George Clooney and Grant Heslov producer credits) without showing what this play is about.

And mentioning John Wells getting the gig because he is buddies with Clooney is basically the truth. But treating it as a nice gesture because he gave Clooney ER is not something you do with a Pulitzer Prize winning play being the movie in question. Clooney and Heslov do not think they need a heavyweight doing this. Fine if they believe in the text, so did Friedkin himself in his adaptations, but he is not in my top 50 of directors I would want adapting this play. He got this gig and is able to make movies because of who he knows and there is something infuriating about that.

May 10, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterCMG

I think the thing that bugs me most about the trailer is how much sunlight there is. The entire stage version takes place in the house, and the windows are blocked out for most of the play. If I remember right, the lack of sunlight is mentioned a few times in the play.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMason

Wait! 90s! Yes! Doesn't this have a weird Marvin's Room sort of sheen to it? Or like, What's Eating Gilbert Grape? It doesn't feel like a 2013 movie. Which might have more to do with the lack of adult dramas these days, but...

I'm expecting the worst out of all of this mess. I hope I am wrong. Desperately.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJake D

"People are talking about Meryl's voice, but I think it makes sense for an older heavily medicated smoker"

That's right - the decision to go for a deeper, raspier register is thoroughly logical. But the ability to do that register and not sound like you are putting on a funny voice is a whole other thing.

Day Lewis altered his voice in Lincoln and sounded natural, as did Bening in Kids Are All Right, as did Streep herself in Prada and Iron Lady.

Here she doesn't sound natural.

And when I say 'natural', I don't necessarily mean 'naturalistic' - I just mean 'not sounding like you are doing a rushed Judy Davis parody on SNL'.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commentergoran

goran
You're telling me Day Lewis' voice choice didn't make you pause for ONE second when you first saw the trailer? Or are you conveniently forgetting that and skipping to your impression after you'd watched the whole movie? Why was so much space in articles given to writing about his choice for Lincoln's voice if it didn't stick out like a sore thumb at first? Do you remember Streep's Julia Child? How much of a hurdle that voice was and how she made it real? Watch Chalize Theron in Monster or Sean Penn in Milk, as two recent examples. Watch those trailers again and tell me they don't sound unbelievable. Great actors can make you accept lots of things. But after one trailer? Probably not.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterRene

Whatever happens... Streep's 18th nomination is a safe bet!
I was worried after her win that there would be a long time for another nomination. Looks like there will be no extended break with Streep and Oscar.
As for a fourth? Who knows. I do not think that she is a loser if she doesn't win-

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJamie

rene,
I was about to comment something like that. when the lincoln trailer came out there was a lot of discussion about daniel's voice, some found it weird then and there was the "but that's how lincoln spoke according to historical accounts" argument.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commentermarcelo

I thought it was a misleading trailer. Biggest offense: that chirpy alt country song. I loved Julia in this and the word from advanced screenings back in March have been quite good for her and the film. I mean, she has the grey roots. She looks older than usual. Giving nothing? what the hell. This is the most "in character" she has ever been. I think some people just can't get over the Julia hate. Is it because she was the most popular actress once? Is it because of her mouth? What? Meryl, of couse, is on point. Her accent is supposed to be more prominent than the rest because she's from a different generation.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commenteramazon

Meryl hamming it up? Well, er, the role is kinda hammy so that makes sense.

Genuinely can't remember the character that Benedict Cumberbatch plays.

Saw the trailer this evening before "The Great Gatsby" and it looks good on the big screen. Doesn't necessarily mean much, but sometimes these plays-turned-films can feel so small and uncinematic.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterGlenn

But Julia does look old and worn-out in the trailer? Rather than not aged since 1997...

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterbacio

I'm a huge Meryl fan, but I'm going to wait and see on this one. I remember everyone getting super excited before Doubt came out and that didn't live up to the expectations. It's a long way to go 'til end of year..... (but, it's true, I've watched the trailer 4x!)

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterScott

I'm really excited for this one, mainly because of Meryl and Juliette. But that trailer did nothing for me.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterSad man

the house of the spirits 2: the meryling

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterpar3182

I didn't see the Lincoln trailer before the movie. I sensed nothing jarring about Theron in either Monster or its trailer, ditto Sean Penn in Milk.

I did see the Julie and Julia trailer - and Meryl's Mrs.Doubtfire-does-Julia-Child voice from the trailer carried over into the full feature in all its grating over-affected intensity. That's my candidate for worst Oscar-nominated performance this side of Michael Caine in Cider House Rules.

And potentially disliking a single Julia Roberts performance only makes me a Julia Roberts hater to crazy people.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commentergoran

I don't usually watch trailers so I might be wrong, but this one has a mediocre vibe. Very A Thousand Acres.

Let's hope it's not as long as the play since Mr. Wells it's not precisely a virtuoso.

I don't like Meryl's wig and voice, but who cares? We're all going to go see it and we all know she's totally getting her 18th. Oscars are given by default lately. Julia in Laura Linney's role looks good. I think I'm going to particularly like Julianne Nicholson.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterPeggy Sue

It is probably wrong to judge on a trailer, and the trailer for The Iron Lady didn't show the subtlety Streep brought to that role - so there's hope in that department, and I was excited that Roberts appeared to be giving a performance after such a long time.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoe UK

I cannot bel;ieve people are saying this is julia from 97,where is the red hair and megawatt smile plus she would not have touched this in the 90's,i am thinking meryl looks a bit hammy,she's always ACTING nowadays i miss the 80's and 90's meryl where it really did seem natural now it's starting to look like a sideshow or someones party piece but i live in hope,just for the record i think doubt is her worst performance.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commentermark

goran -- i hear you on the Julia thing -- i hate being called a Streep hater just because i haven't liked every single one (what about the ones I am gaga for that i think earn her her rep?) . i even got called out by crazed Pfeiffer Pfans (and i'm like the president of that club!) for saying that she was totally mediocre in I Could Never Be Your Woman) but that said, people are right when they say that people freaked out about DDL's voice in Lincoln at first.

i mean people got vicious about it when the trailer came out and then months later everyone thought he was god's gift with the exact same voice in context.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterNathanielR

I'm definitely a big yes. Is there any chance Ewan could finally get some awards attention for this role (especially considering he has Weinstein, Clooney and Heslov backing him), or are the other supporting actor roles meatier? I know he's had a couple of GG Comedy/Musical nods, but it's time his value is more widely recognized.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterSuzanne

Meryl's voice does not really bother me that much. With the Oklahoma accent, she is my older version of Karen Silkwood..

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJamie

The trailer was vague yet felt familiar, so I'd be a MAYBE on this if it wasn't sure to get Oscar Buzz. Since it will, however, I'm a YES on seeing the film.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterDaniel Armour

Jamie -- if Karen Silkwood had, yknow, lived and birthed and verbally abused a slew of girls and become a drug addict ;) But yeah. it's fun to think of Streep returning to Oklahoma with a variation of the same wig!

May 11, 2013 | Registered CommenterNATHANIEL R

The "is anybody supposed to smoke?" line made me cringe, to be honest. Reminded me of line readings she's done before, like the "pile of stuff" barb in The Devil Wears Prada. And also, "Look, you blew out my light" from Doubt. She plays sardonic a total of one ways. I think her character work is getting so stale that its becoming easier and easier to draw arrows between her affectations in various roles.

Her physical appearance intriged me in this trailer until the Merylisms broke the surface.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterHayden W

love the fact Streep looks her age in this.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterbrandz

I broke and watched the trailer because I wasn't going to miss an adaptation of this play anyhow.

I'm always unsure where to stand on judging trailers but then I guess that's what they're there for. I was wondering what they would do re "opening up the play". Ideally, I was hoping they'd stick to the in-house thing because so much could have been netted from the house having this claustrophobic way of making everyone who passes through the doorways just a bit more neurotic. All stage dramas don't need to be opened up, so I'm often a bit sceptical when some seem to get opened up for no good reason.

The trailer is so hazy, though. Would anyone completely unfamiliar with the text understand what the movie is about? Not even getting to the "will it be as dark as the text" - the trailer doesn't offer anything in the way of story.

re Wells, the best asset he has for directing this is oddly his work on "Shameless" which is about a poor, confused, over-exhausted family and the frenetic nature of "Shameless" would work on something like "August: Osage County" but this trailer seems much more easy than the frenetic nature I'd expect.

After the trailer, I'm a maybe so on liking it. I will watch it, but the trailer doesn't seem to offer anything really.

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAndrew K.

I'm a Yes because how could I not be but I could easily end up hating it.
By the way, Violet is OBVIOUSLY a drug addict - Santa Clause is real!

May 11, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJames T

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>