Ann Savage owned that movie, one of the great noir performances, pretty much the definition of what it is. Marie Windsor, Audrey Totter, Gloria Grahame, Gene Tierney and Lisbeth Scott were also amazing. Noir always offered up meaty roles for women.
Vickie and I saw the new film as an AMC "Early Access Screening" and it's astounding. We're not familiar with the original, so we saw this as a new story. It was one of the most stunningly beautiful films I've ever seen, and if it's released in Dolby Cinema, I'll definitely see it again.
Del Toro really managed to make a noir film in color. Interestingly, there's going to be a special screening of a black and white film print of this film in Los Angeles at the American Cinematique: NIGHTMARE ALLEY: VISION IN DARKNESS AND LIGHT – Special Limited Run of Black & White Version - American Cinematheque
I don't know who did the color work on this film, but I suspect they did both black and white and color passes to get this look. It's honestly the first film I've ever seen that managed to have both a look of a classic film noir and technicolor film simultaneously. I wonder if @Vidiot has seen this yet?
I thought the ending was perfect. It was set up earlier in the film. BroJB describes it well. That's what was set up, and paid off. It wasn't a happy Hollywood ending by any stretch.
I have not, but it's on the list. The trailers look stunning. The color was done by Stefan Sonnenfeld of CO3, the highest-paid colorist in the world (and deservedly so).
Apparently, I won't be granted my wish to see this in Dolby Cinema, as Spider-Man: No Way Home is in every special theater.
Ann Savage's Detour performance is as good as any big name actor in a big budget film could possibly give. Historic. And I'd add Mary Beth Hughes and Jean Wallace to your list.
I saw this movie last night and I'm going to agree that it is the most beautifully filmed movie as a color noir film I've ever seen . In fact I spotted amazing '40's movie star still photographer Halsey lighting techniques that used to require lots of dodge & burn airbrush lab work back then look better in this movie. However, I have to say the movie plods on way too slow with dialog spoken too casually and barely audible in some parts that sent the only three people in the theater with me two rows down walking out in the middle of it. There's also no background history to explain Cooper's character's motivation on why he'ld take such a path with his life because most of his shots are his face barely lit at night drumming up work at a carnival with him just staring at people as if he was a mentally challenged hayseed mute. The arc of his character development didn't match up due to a lack of clarity for what was motivated him with very little character building and back story. I just didn't find Cooper credible not because of his acting but how his part was written. I'ld wished there was more lighting that lit the faces much like the Tyrone Power black and white noir version so people's emotions would register as well as move the plot along more quickly with a pace and timing that didn't make it a long walk for such a short story.
I wonder how much was lighting and how much was retouching? Really? I didn't have any problem, and I often get the caption device at AMC theaters. Okay. Your mileage various from mine. I just assumed he was much less smart than he thought he was - good at reading people but openly being manipulated himself. Again, I thought it moved quite swiftly. But then, we really love 3-hour Bollywood movies, so we might have a different sense of time.
Come on, Chris! Quote stacking your responses, all in one liners?! REALLY?! How am I going to choose which I like and dislike?
I think the story is the star of the movie if they can just get the right lead to make it credible and I include both the Tyrone Power and Bradley Cooper roles. The story is more of a Face In The Crowd type plot where that movie had Andy Griffith change credibly from a simple minded hayseed into a politically power hungry vicious A-hole that done him in. But I'm going to buy the BD just for the cinematic eye candy and time machine to the early '40's immersive qualities.
Saw it this afternoon and really liked it. I've seen some grousing about it plodding in the second half or third act, but I never felt the least bit bored or wanted to check the time. It looked beautiful, and I especially how like how much of the carnival set at least SEEMED to be real. There may have been CGI augmentation, but it was very well done. Like any good noir, the ladies are beautiful, with Toni Collette, Rooney Mara and Cate Blanchett all lighting up the screen in different ways. It's a shame its apparently a bomb at the box office. Sure seems like drama for adults is DOA. Gotta be an action/superhero franchise to pull any numbers.
At any point during the scene of old and very authentic looking for the time period recording devices confuse you on what was going on? The eye candy of those scenes constantly made me say... ...Wait, wait, what was that click? What's goin' on with that thing. It looks gorgeous but I don't know what it's doing. It's such a dream like movie which plays into its title that I had a hard time keeping up with the plot along with the other reasons mentioned up thread.
Not really. The only thing I found confusing was the use of the word "geek", but I see that was mentioned up thread.
Putting it against Spider-Man and it failing at the box office was a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy. Even if many adults wanted to see it they couldn’t as they were already taking the kids to see Spider-Man this weekend.
From what I understand (and having seen the original film with Tyrone Power), Del Toro expanded quite a bit with the screenplay. I have no idea how accurately the film represented the book (for the first film) but I’m sure that, knowing Del Toro, there were other things he probably took from it that didn’t make the original film as well.