Category Archives: Stanley Tucci

Conclave-2024

Conclave-2024

Director Edward Berger

Starring Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow

Scott’s Review #1,447

Reviewed October 17, 2024

Grade: A

I was fortunate to see the Conclave (2024) premiere at our local art theater before most of the public audiences had. I anticipate those talking about the ‘twist’ at the end will be stunned. Having been told there was a ‘twist’ at the start, but not knowing what it was kept me wondering.

I’ll say nothing more about the ‘twist’.

Admittedly, the premise didn’t wow me, and I only saw Conclave because of the acclaim and awards season buzz surrounding it.

Heavyweight actors like Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, and Isabella Rossellini didn’t hurt.

The end product is well written, well acted, and well produced, with a tinge of push-pull between liberalism and conservativism that feels timely and relevant.

It’s based on a 2016 novel written by Robert Harris.

The story is fictional and follows one of the world’s most secretive and ancient events, selecting the new Pope. Cardinal Lawrence, expertly played by Fiennes, is tasked with running this complex process after the unexpected death of the beloved current Pope.

Once the Catholic Church’s most powerful leaders, most chomping at the bit to be elected the next Pope, have gathered from around the world, Lawrence uncovers a trail of secrets involving the dead Pope, secrets which could shake the foundations of the Church.

They are locked in the Vatican, protected from the outside world until the majority chooses the new Pope.

Edward Berger did a phenomenal job bringing the 1930 epic All Quiet on the Western Front (2022) to legions of audiences and a slew of Oscar nominations. All bets are that he does it again with Conclave.

The screenplay is written by Peter Straughan, primarily a British playwright. The action immediately begins with the Pope’s death, and most of it is a slow buildup, sometimes even a crawl.

Halfway through, I wondered why Conclave was receiving so much notice. After the conclusion, I could not stop thinking about it for days.

Berger/Straughan play their cards close to the pocket throughout most of the running time, toying with audiences who expect a traditional, mainstream affair before the rug is yanked from beneath them.

Usually, dramas or thrillers with a religious theme, mainly centering around questioning the Catholic Church, risk dismissal or ridicule. I’m anxious to see how this plays out with Conclave.

In hindsight, more than the obvious make Conclave worth talking about after the upside-down ride that results.

Character-driven, Lawrence questions his faith and devotion and doesn’t even want to be the new Pope. We’re not exactly sure why he wants to leave the Church. Is he involved in a secret scandal? Could he be in a relationship?

One intelligent scene mentions that a Pope should not be sure of his faith and should question it. Traditions can be tweaked for the times. A conservative leader mocks the Pope for ruining the Catholic Church with whimsical decisions embracing the current times. Another liberal leader doesn’t think he went far enough.

It’s easy to see that Berger/Straughan/Harris have Pope Francis, who was elected in 2013, in mind. Having strongly brought more progressive thought to the Catholic Church, it’s easy to see the representation.

Fiennes gives a powerful performance as a decent man who tries to do the right thing without favoritism or conflict. He is subdued but strong-willed, and the performance is understated. He gives so much to a role that could be mistaken for too little.

Volker Bertelmann composes the score, which is reminiscent of All Quiet on the Western Front. It has a soft tone, is not bombastic, and slowly increases intensity during scenes. The buildup is tense and magnificent.

Conclave (2024) is a human story about humanity and imperfection. It’s also about human complexities, mistakes, and kindness. It magnifies the scope of the Catholic Church and reminds audiences that those shrouded within its wall are not without imperfections.

It also reminds us that even the Catholic Church has corruption.

The Witches-2020

The Witches-2020

Director-Robert Zemeckis

Starring Anne Hathaway, Octavia Spencer

Scott’s Review #1,314

Reviewed November 16, 2022

Grade: B

A remake of the 1990 film starring Anjelica Huston, The Witches (2020) sometimes delivers the goods and occasionally derails off the tracks into campy, over-the-top, wackadoo.

Mostly, on the part of star Anne Hathaway who plays an evil and powerful witch.

But, regardless of what this adult thinks, it will please, surprise, and fascinate youngsters who see it. There’s a comforting and vital message of friendship and family roots ingrained in the story which is a nice touch.

In 1968, seven-year-old orphan Charlie Hansen (Jahzir Bruno) travels from Chicago to Alabama to live with his grandmother, Agatha (Octavia Spencer), after his parents are killed in a car accident.

After he is approached by a dastardly witch in a grocery store they flee to a seaside resort to avoid the child-hating witches. Agatha has a troubled past with the witches who long ago turned her best friend into a chicken.

When the two arrive at their hotel, they find a coven with villainous plans. They are accompanied by a mouse named Daisy and an English boy named Bruno (Codie-Lei Eastick).

I much prefer the first half of The Witches to the last.

The wonderful and caring relationship between Agatha and Charlie is a beautiful dynamic. When she envelops him with love and southern cooking in her cozy home, understanding the trauma he has endured, it is heartwarming and genuine.

Spencer is terrific in any role she plays, of course, but her calm and stoic demeanor when paired against the witches is lovely. She is prepared for trouble and sneaks to a back room where she keeps crystals, and other anti-witch weaponry.

But the relationship with the little boy is darling and top-notch. I wish they would have just stayed at home and nurtured their relationship with Daisy and Bruno.

The weakest section of the film involves the witches themselves. As they flock to the hotel for a convention to plot the destruction of children everywhere, they appear more silly than scary, especially when they remove their wigs and reveal bald, scabby heads.

Director, Robert Zemeckis must have given Hathaway free range to ham it up because she certainly does just that.

I’m a fan of hers so it’s not a personal knock but she teeters toward ridiculous pretty quickly. I get the need to make a children’s film villain colorful, memorable, and loud but there is no restraint, causing the character to feel more silly than terrifying.

On the plus side, Hathaway must have had a ball letting loose and leaving all constraints on the sidelines.

Inevitably, the kids are changed into cute mice and must convince their loved ones that they are themselves while figuring out how to change back to human children.

Not much is different from the 1990 version besides a tweak here and there and the story is the same but I think I prefer the original by a hair.

Huston beats Hathaway in a comparison.

Some inconsistencies emerge like how Agatha can afford to stay in a grandiose hotel. She knows someone connected to the hotel but the who’s and why’s aren’t clear.

It’s never explained what happened to Agatha’s friend who wound up as a chicken and I wanted more from Stanley Tucci than an uninteresting hotel manager role with little to do.

But, the action sequences are adventurous and energetic and it’s fun cheering the turning of the Grand High Witch (Hathaway) into a rat.

I wanted more of the homespun love between Agatha and Charlie and the simple southern town that felt so lovely and welcoming, but The Witches (2020) provides family fun entertainment that many can enjoy.

Beauty and the Beast-2017

Beauty and the Beast-2017

Director-Bill Condon

Starring-Emma Watson, Dan Stevens

Scott’s Review #634

Reviewed April 18, 2017

Grade: A-

Upon going to see 2017’s spring release offering of the live-action version of the Disney animated classic, Beauty and the Beast, I was not sure what to expect.

Would it be a cheesy or amateurish retread of the 1991 animated smash only with human beings? Why the lackluster March release date? Surely this is telling, otherwise, why not release the film in the coveted fourth quarter with potential Oscar buzz?

I do not have the answers to all of these questions, but this version of Beauty and the Beast is enchanting, romantic, and lovely- a spring treat for the entire family to enjoy.

Our protagonist, Belle, (producers wisely casting Harry Potter legend Emma Watson), is a kindly farm girl living with her father, Maurice (Kevin Kline),  in a quaint village outside of Paris.

Considered a bit odd by her village mates because she loves to read, she rebuffs the advances of the dashing soldier, Gaston, because he is arrogant- the other village ladies (as well as Gaston’s gay companion LeFou) flaunt over Gaston’s good looks.

When Maurice ventures into parts unknown and stumble upon a dilapidated castle, he is locked up by a vicious beast, having once been a handsome prince, since cursed by a beggar woman.

The only way the beast can return to his former self is to find true love before a wilted rose loses all of its peddles- enter Belle to the rescue. Belle convinces the Beast to let her stay prisoner and release her father. Will Beast and Belle fall madly in love?

Of course, they will. The fated romance is part of what makes the film heartwarming and nice.

The now-legendary classic fairy tale feels fresh and energized with the Disney-produced project. Director Bill Condon carefully, and successfully, crafts an honest effort, making sure that while providing a fairy tale happy ending, not to make the film seem contrived, overblown, or overdramatized.

I fell for the film hook, line, and sinker. it is an uplifting experience. The song and dance numbers abound with gusto and good costumes- my personal favorites being the rousing “Be Our Guest” and the sentimental “Beauty and the Beast”.

The crucial romance between Watson’s Belle, and the Beast, earnestly played by Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey fame), works in spades, as their chemistry feels authentic and passionate. As Belle is at first held captive by the misunderstood bad boy instead of Maurice, the pair at first loathe each other, but this is done with innocence and no malice.

Condon wonderfully exudes the right amount of slow build to make the pair beloved by audiences with the correct amount of pacing.

The CGI is heavy in Beauty and the Beast, as is expected. The distraction of the Beast is a bit confusing. Was the Beast a complete CGI creation save for the close-ups or was Watson dancing with Stevens when filming commenced in certain scenes? I am unsure.

The controversial “gay storyline”, which helped the film be banned in the southern United States and Russia, as well as other countries, is pure and utter rubbish.

The subject is explored extremely superficially and not worthy of all the fuss.

Worthier of mention is the wonderful diversity that is featured in the film, most notably in the opening sequence. Interracial couples appear in the form of Madame de Garderobe (Audra McDonald), the opera singer turned wardrobe, and Maestro Cadenza (Stanley Tucci) turned harpsichord.

On the gay issue, how sweet that the implied gay character of LeFlou to find love with another man at the end of the film.

A minor complaint is the scattered authentic French accents by many of the household staff and village people, but Belle and Maurice speak in British tongue. Being a fairy tale, liberties must be taken and suspension of disbelief is certainly a necessity, but this was noticed.

Beauty and the Beast is a lovely experience that mixes fantastic musical numbers with romance with a side of diversity mixed in for good measure.

Since the film will undoubtedly be seen by oodles of youngsters and teens this is a wonderful aspect of the film and hopefully, a shining, positive example in film making.

Oscar Nominations: Best Production Design, Best Costume Design

Julie & Julia-2009

Julie & Julia-2009

Director Nora Ephron

Starring Meryl Streep, Amy Adams

Scott’s Review #588

Reviewed January 7, 2017

Grade: A-

Julie & Julia (2009) is a darling film about cooking that centers and centers on the legendary chef Julia Child. It is for the foodie or culinary geek in all of us.

The film is lighthearted and will ruffle no feathers, but it is a delicious well-told treat.

The film tells of the life of Julia Child (Meryl Streep), at one time an aspiring chef, contrasted with the life of a young New Yorker, blogger Julie Powell (Amy Adams), who is determined to cook all five hundred twenty-four recipes in Child’s famous cookbook, Mastering the Art of French Cooking, within one year.

The film, of course, would not be half as good without the amazing talents of Streep, who portrays Julia Child herself. All of Julia Child’s personality characteristics are portrayed exceptionally well by Streep.

Her laugh, voice, and zest for life, are all perfect. Of course, since Streep is not nearly as tall a woman as Child was, liberties had to be taken by way of camera trickery.

Regardless of Streep’s performance, props for a nice performance by Adams, too.

Julie & Julia (2009) is a cute, charming, light, fun movie. I thoroughly recommend it.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Meryl Streep

Easy A-2010

Easy A-2010

Director Will Gluck

Starring Emma Stone

Scott’s Review #478

70123920

Reviewed September 10, 2016

Grade: B-

Easy A (2010) is an example of a film where some parts are good, and other parts are dumb. However, at the end of the day it is forgettable and who will remember a film like this in ten years?

The film is a teen comedy about a girl who makes up a rumor about herself to gain attention from her peers.

Emma Stone is great in this movie and shows the enormous potential of her budding film career. She reminds me a bit of Lindsay Lohan. She is likable and great at comedy and presents a fun persona.

Also deserving of credit is Lisa Kudrow who appears in the movie.

At times, the dialogue is intelligent and witty, other times it turns into a typical dumb comedy and that is sad because based on the star power involved, Easy A (2010) might have been a better film than it was.

Big Night-1996

Big Night-1996

Director Stanley Tucci, Campbell Scott

Starring Stanley Tucci, Tony Shalhoub

Scott’s Review #300

305300

Reviewed December 16, 2015

Grade: B+

Big Night (1996) is a sweet, whimsical little film that is a food lover’s dream come true since that is the focal point of the story with more than one dish being prepared on-screen giving it realism.

It centers on the restaurant business and, specifically, how two brothers struggle to keep their failing restaurant afloat through their love and passion for food.

The story tells of two Italian immigrant brothers, Primo and Secondo, played by Tony Shalhoub and Stanley Tucci, respectively.

The time is the 1950s and they reside in blue-collar New Jersey. Times are tough for them as they try to succeed in the difficult restaurant business- they specialize in Italian food of course.

Secondo is a playboy of sorts- suave and handsome, he dates Phyllis (Minnie Driver) while galavanting with a sophisticated older woman named Gabriela, the wife of a competitor.

Primo, on the other hand, is quiet, and serious, yet an all-star chef. The food he prepares is wonderful and his talent is evident.

But how can they market themselves to be successful?

At this point, their restaurant is dying and they risk being reduced to returning to Italy or eke out a meager existence working for someone else.

An idea is announced to have a celebrity singer (Louis Prima) perform for a one-night extravaganza at their restaurant, where they will make the meal of their lives and impress the town, thus achieving success.

The film is charming and my favorite parts are on the “big night”. As the duo prepared the liquor order and shopped for flowers and other decorations in preparation, the mood and spirit left me with a warm feeling.

What a sense of togetherness Primo and Secondo, along with friends, felt to achieve this challenging goal. Inevitably, there is tension between the brothers, and between Secondo and Phyllis, but truthfully, these are merely sub-plots, and the heart of the film is in the food.

The scenes that take place in the kitchen left my mouth watering. As Secondo prepares a baked pasta dish (Timpano), the meal oozes with love and tastiness. The entire story arc is grand and magnificent.

The group of diners revels in the dining room of the restaurant enjoying spirits and dancing the night away. By morning everyone is full and drunk, both with love and alcohol, but most are happy. They get merry as they eat the night away.

I could almost taste the main course!

A subplot that works for me is the burgeoning romance between reserved Primo and equally reserved flower shop owner, Ann. Both very timid, they finally muster the courage to admit their feelings for each other while enjoying (what else?) wine and food- what better way to begin a romance?

The tenderness and chemistry between these two are very innocent and captivated me while watching the film.

The final scene of the brothers making an omelet is also wonderful and a fitting way to stress togetherness and perseverance, which is what the small film is really about.

For lovers of food, Big Night (1996) is a shining moment.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Male Lead-Tony Shalhoub, Stanley Tucci, Best First Screenplay (won), Best First Feature

Spotlight-2015

Spotlight-2015

Director Thomas McCarthy

Starring Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams

Scott’s Review #294

80061341

Reviewed December 9, 2015

Grade: B+

Spotlight (2015) is a film with an important story to tell.

A telling of true events that occurred within the Catholic Archdiocese for ages, Spotlight’s focus is specifically on the Boston scandals, as a team of reporters working for the Boston Globe uncovered and exposed a multitude of child molestation cases committed by priests.

They were subsequently covered up, leaving victims paid off to keep quiet. The number of proven cases in Boston alone is staggering.

Starring are a plethora of talents including Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, and Rachel McAdams, who lead the pack.

They make up the “Spotlight” team at the newspaper,  an investigative unit that works on special stories as they arise.

Their new boss, Marty Baron (ironically a Jewish man), played compellingly by Liev Schrieber, takes over as head of the department. He quizzically asks why the story is not already a priority. Suddenly it is a hot-burner issue and the film delves into an investigation to uncover the facts.

Spotlight is a minimalist film. There is nothing cinematically unique or razzle-dazzle about it, but somehow that is okay.

In some aspects, the film reminds me of the 1975 thriller All The Presidents Men, starring Dustin Hoffman.

For instance, the bleak, bare news rooms-sterile in their look, are similar- cubicle after cubicle,  harsh lighting, and generic conference rooms.

This is the filmmaker’s intent.

Also, the fast, energetic pacing, successfully emitting the tight deadlines newspaper folks face, transfers perfectly on film.

The sexual abuse scandal is a cold, harsh reality and the film introduces several victims, who, now as adults, are forever scarred. Some attend support groups, some take drugs, one is sadly not “all there”. Another, now a gay man, was singled out by a priest during a vulnerable period in the then-young boy’s, life.

It is a heartbreaking reality that many victims in the film are based on real cases.

Let’s focus on Schrieber’s character for a minute.  He gives such an understated yet compelling performance there is a risk it will wind up being overlooked. He calmly, yet passionately initiates the case. It is not a showy performance and subdued but a compelling one if enough attention is paid to it. He is a standout.

Unfortunately, the film does not delve much into the defense (if any) of the Catholic church. Did they do anything but deny the allegations? Why were the victims paid off? Not much is noted from the church’s point of view.

In real life, the Catholic church did hide the abuse that transpired for decades.

A slight negative is that the film does not delve into the characters’ personal lives.

Michael Keaton’s character, Robby Robinson, is arguably the lead character, spearheading the case,  though very little is known about him.

Is he married? happily? Yes, he is a workaholic, but what else?

Ruffalo’s Michael Rezendes is separated from his wife, but little is known to the reasons.

Finally, McAdam’s Sacha is probably the most fleshed-out. She is happily married, close with her religious grandmother, and hurt by the scandal. But we do not know her in-depth either.

I found myself wanting to know more about these people.

All in all, Spotlight (2015) is a superior film deserving of the recognition it is receiving. Intense, gritty, and filled with honesty, it is a story that needed to be told and has been told well.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Tom McCarthy, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Ruffalo, Best Supporting Actress-Rachel McAdams, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 5 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Tom McCarthy (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Editing (won), Robert Altman Award (won)

A Little Chaos-2014

A Little Chaos-2014

Director Alan Rickman

Starring Kate Winslet, Matthias Schoenaerts

Scott’s Review #269

80017099

Reviewed August 22, 2015

Grade: B-

A Little Chaos (2014) is a difficult film to review. The film does not kick into high gear, or much of gear until the final thirty minutes or so as the drama hits a crescendo and past events are suddenly explained.

At this point, it becomes a very entertaining film.

Until then, it is largely a bore and slow-paced.

Starring Kate Winslet and Alan Rickman, who also directs the film, A Little Chaos is a good film with beautiful period piece costumes to marvel over, and feels great, but misses the mark with a lack of balancing the momentum throughout the length of the film.

It is also largely fictionalized, making the viewing less enjoyable.

A period drama set at the gorgeous Versailles in France, the period in the late 1600s when King Louis XIV of France is in power and lives on the illustrious estate.

Landscaper, Andre Le Notre, hires unconventional gardener Sabine (Winslet) to create one of the gardens.

Sabine is progressive and does not live in the past. Rather, she has ideas for creating a unique pattern. Sabine is instructed to incorporate a wonderful fountain within the garden. She faces hostility from staff members for simply being a woman and they refuse to work for her.

Others admire her creativity.

As the plot unfolds, Sabine has romantic feelings for Andre, a man trapped in a loveless marriage with Francoise, and they begin a tender courtship.

Sabine is haunted by the past and frequently hears cries in her dreams. The audience does not know what her past life was, only that she is widowed.

The final act of the film brings everything together nicely. We learn about Sabine’s past and her suggested dalliance with Andre comes to fruition.

After the film, I was left thinking how exceptional it was, but then remembered the majority of it had dragged.

The themes of A Little Chaos are class systems, feminism, and societal views. At first, snubbed by some for being a commoner, Sabine slowly is accepted by the royal figures, including the King himself, whom Sabrine humorously mistakes for the gardener at one point.

Ideally, it would have been lovely if a woman had been hired to create the garden.

Sadly, events do not happen this way but is someone’s fantasy.

A Little Chaos (2014) has great potential and looks beautiful- my main complaint is for most of the film nothing happens.

Also disappointing is that the film was not filmed at the historical Versailles, nor was it even shot in France. Every exterior scene was filmed in England.

This is not a deal-breaker, but some genuineness would have been nice. Another major detraction is that Sabine De Barra is not even a real-life figure, but rather is fictionalized- sort of how the past should have been but wasn’t really.

Having been a real person would have made the film more interesting. What is the investment?

From an acting standpoint, the film succeeds. Winslet, a highly talented actress, is well cast and the chemistry between her and Matthias Schoenaerts is palpable. Both actors are believable in their roles.

Stanley Tucci, typically great in whatever he appears in, plays Phillippe, a silly, slightly effeminate Duke who does more to annoy than to amuse and is a trivial character.

Throughout my viewing of the film, I kept thinking of it as the type of film that should be liked because it looks great, but something was missing.

The royal drama, sexual dalliances, and antics were fun, but I felt like the film could have been much more than it ended up being.

Jack the Giant Slayer-2013

Jack the Giant Slayer-2013

Director Bryan Singer

Starring Nicholas Hoult, Eleanor Tomlinson

Scott’s Review #93

70213512

Reviewed July 4, 2014

Grade: C

Jack the Giant Slayer (2013) is a fantasy, CGI-laden film most likely targeted at a young audience.

It tells the story of Jack, a farmhand who must rescue a beautiful princess from the world of giants after an accident causes a gateway to open to their world.

The film is loosely based on the fairy tale “Jack and the Beanstalk”.

The special effects in the Land of the Giants are the most impressive aspect.

Otherwise, it is a love story mixed with adventure and is not very engaging. It is also very predictable.

Heavyweights Ewan McGregor and Stanley Tucci appear in over-the-top performances and the acting of the princess (Eleanor Tomlinson) is shockingly wooden.

The finale is mildly entertaining as a chase through the castle occurs, but the film is so weighted down by the effects and the lack of a good story that it is a middle-of-the-road film.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire-2013

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire-2013

Director Francis Lawrence

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson

Scott’s Review #1

70278934

Reviewed June 16, 2014

Grade: B-

I confess to not having read any of the Hunger Games books, so I am critiquing the film on its film merits only with no knowledge of the books.

Interestingly, I graded the first Hunger Games (2012) film a B- and that is what I am giving this one, almost for the same reason.

The first hour sets up the second hour, but it is unnecessarily drawn out. At times it’s slightly dull.

The meat of the film then takes off and the film is quite good though the film still does not completely hold my attention throughout.

First and foremost, Jennifer Lawrence is the best part. She has the charisma and likability to carry it off.

The chemistry between the two leads (Lawrence and Hutcherson) is there so there is rooting value for the couple.

The third part of the triangle is weak (Liam Hemsworth has far too little screen time to make him a viable rooting factor).

Donald Sutherland is wonderful as the evil President, but Philip Seymour Hoffman seems to phone in his performance and the character is not all that intriguing.

The mood of the film and visuals (fog, train sequences) are great because there is modern darkness, and the premise and wondering who will die next during the games are interesting.

The somewhat twist at the end was effective.

To summarize nice characters/acting, great looking film, mediocre story, and slow pacing in the first act.