Page 186 of 186
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:14 pm
The core problem was the very poor original product.....the graphic novel. Within it's genre it was just not up to standard.
I still don't think the film was a bomb, but it could have been so much more had Fav taken the main theme, ditched the novel and re-wrote the story to give it proper meat.
And in this case, it was one movie where Daniel should not
have had a say in how many lines he had. He said himself he was instrumental in cutting his lines to give a "silent stranger" Eastwood-type effect. All that did was leave the audience confused over who and what his character actually was. He should have been the main character and in allowing or pushing for his lines to be cut he handed over the best of a shaky plot to his co-star. It was a better Ford movie than a Craig movie. Ford got the better lines, the better action, the better relationships with the other characters. I think Daniel has to take some responsibility for shooting himself in the foot with his own input (pun intended).
Daniel did his best. And, for me, his worst movie is always FAR BETTER than a stinker from Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, purely because he has the edge on them in terms of charisma. Directors need to trust Daniel as an actor. Marc Forster did not seem to do that in QOS either, imo... As I've said before 'just keep the camera on Daniel and everything will be alright'. Obviously, Daniel wants to work with the best people and the draw for C&A was working with HF and playing a cowboy. Remember in the Favreau Q&A (on the blu ray) where Daniel said he'd had more fun on this set than he'd had in 10 years? Daniel doesn't bullshit, especially when he's in conversation with a man who he would consider his friend. But I guess the words 'must try harder' are written on the C&A script. I'm going to continue to watch and enjoy it though... it was a brave and bold step to make a movie like this.
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:17 pm
PS... While we're talking about Daniel getting 'swallowed up' in ensemble movies, I sincerely hope this does not happen with Monuments Men. I hope Clooney gives Daniel ample screen time... but then, we don't know what role he's playing yet... do we??
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:29 pm
NextBondGirl wrote:PS... While we're talking about Daniel getting 'swallowed up' in ensemble movies, I sincerely hope this does not happen with Monuments Men. I hope Clooney gives Daniel ample screen time... but then, we don't know what role he's playing yet... do we??
This is my concern too.
On the one hand, I am excited to see him in a film with a good non-formulaic story and wide range of talent alongside him. C&A had the talent but not the product, this looks (at least at this stage) like it has both product and talent.
But he does have this habit of standing back to let others shine. That is all very well, it's generous and truly artistic in that it suggests he is thinking of the film rather than his own ego.
But......it does run the risk of him giving away his best material (as in C&A) or being swallowed up by names which the film industry (at this time anyway) revere more such as Clooney, and this is my concern with Monument Men. Will Daniel push himself forward to make sure he gets his time in the spotlight?
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:54 pm
Yes, yes, yes!!!!!!!! Abso-f***ing-lutely!!!!!!!!!!!!
He drives you nuts but we love him. For loving him, we want the best for him. For wanting the best for him, we want him to be successful, happy etc etc etc.
Daniel has modesty and humility. These are fine traits in moderation but, sometimes, he can go too far the other way. Witness the bonus features for GWDT. Four hours worth and I spend most of the time searching for Daniel in the crowd. I feel he deliberately hides from the camera a lot, especially if he is not acting a scene. The word PRIVATE is so deeply ingrained in him that it becomes almost an obsession.
Daniel, I love you!!!!!!!!!!! I love you so very much!!!!!!!! PLEASE
believe in yourself more. Others can believe in you too. You are such an amazing person and an amazing actor. You have too let the world see it and you do not have to become an "Ego Monster" to do it!!!
Maybe Daniel is just shy. Maybe, despite all the peons of praise we give him, he really has low self esteem, in a way. I don't know... but I would like very much to ask him and then, hug it all away if he agrees with my summary....
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 5:43 pm
I agree - at times, he is overdoing this. He certainly isn't doing anything to take advantage and encrease his popularity.
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 7:35 pm
I think by nature he is true team player, but in every team there are the ones who lead from the front if not by their own desire then by the quality of what they bring to the team.
He must know his worth, and although he seems almost ego-less to us, we also know that he does have an ego if for no other reason than the public nature of the job he does and the pride he takes in going to the n-th degree to put his all into it. Even those roles which were not as he wanted them to be or those he took to pay the rent, in none of them can it truly be said that he telephoned in his performance. He has a lot of pride in what he does.
But there is a balance there between the good of the many (the film) to be weighed against the good of the one (his career) and sometimes I think he gets that balance a little out of kilter, as in C&A.
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:10 pm
All true, but the director didn't do his job. He should have directed Daniel, not he other way around.