(no subject)
Sep. 9th, 2008 09:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vr_trakowskiWell. Before I saw Iron Man the only thing I can remember seeing Robert Downey Jr. in was Heart and Souls, which didn't make much of an impact on me. Having now seen Iron Man, I'm doing what I usually do when I am particularly impressed by an actor--hunting up some of their films to see their range. Thank you, Netflix. This is a lot easier today than it was in 1996 when I was looking up Paul McGann--and believe me that man has done some strange work. I think this is the first time I've done it for someone truly a "celebrity", so to speak--I tend to favor more obscure people. Pity there isn't more Paul Darrow on Netflix, for instance, though I am impressed to see any at all.
The less said about The Singing Detective, the better. Sheesh.
Heart and Souls was mildly amusing on a rewatch--it's probably been at least a decade--but the plot was pathetically predictable. It does show off Mr. Downey's skills, and the concept is intriguing, but they could have used a semaphore and saved themselves the trouble. Sorry if you like this one, but it's my blog and I'll say what I want to, nyah. :P
Zodiac, on the other tentacle, was fascinating, and I am disappointed that Netflix doesn't have the director's cut because the regular DVD has no commentary track. I was vaguely aware of the facts behind the story, but the movie manages to make itself quite gripping even though the ending is foregone. It's long, but in service of the plot, and as a CSI buff it's interesting to watch police procedures dating from the 1960s and think of all that they must be missing. Plus, large squirrels. *grin* The cast is terrific, I was especially impressed with the main detective (no idea who he is).
What fascinated me in particular, though, was that the character that Mr. Downey plays is basically Tony Stark, pre-Afghanistan. He's not a genius or a billionaire, but the same character traits are there--flamboyance, alcoholism, arrogance, and subversive charm. It doesn't hurt that the character looks much the same, but it's true. The same quips, the same sudden shifts of attention, the same self-centeredness.
Focusing only on that character--Paul Avery--it's sad, too, because the film portrays him as someone eventually sinking into failure, although I don't know if that was actually what happened to him. The film, after all, sees things through the narrow band of the Zodiac murders, and most else falls by the wayside. But as an Iron Man fan I saw Avery as what Tony Stark could have become, had circumstances not changed for him. And I have to wonder if Mr. Downey was consciously basing early Tony on that character.
I really want to hear that commentary track.
The less said about The Singing Detective, the better. Sheesh.
Heart and Souls was mildly amusing on a rewatch--it's probably been at least a decade--but the plot was pathetically predictable. It does show off Mr. Downey's skills, and the concept is intriguing, but they could have used a semaphore and saved themselves the trouble. Sorry if you like this one, but it's my blog and I'll say what I want to, nyah. :P
Zodiac, on the other tentacle, was fascinating, and I am disappointed that Netflix doesn't have the director's cut because the regular DVD has no commentary track. I was vaguely aware of the facts behind the story, but the movie manages to make itself quite gripping even though the ending is foregone. It's long, but in service of the plot, and as a CSI buff it's interesting to watch police procedures dating from the 1960s and think of all that they must be missing. Plus, large squirrels. *grin* The cast is terrific, I was especially impressed with the main detective (no idea who he is).
What fascinated me in particular, though, was that the character that Mr. Downey plays is basically Tony Stark, pre-Afghanistan. He's not a genius or a billionaire, but the same character traits are there--flamboyance, alcoholism, arrogance, and subversive charm. It doesn't hurt that the character looks much the same, but it's true. The same quips, the same sudden shifts of attention, the same self-centeredness.
Focusing only on that character--Paul Avery--it's sad, too, because the film portrays him as someone eventually sinking into failure, although I don't know if that was actually what happened to him. The film, after all, sees things through the narrow band of the Zodiac murders, and most else falls by the wayside. But as an Iron Man fan I saw Avery as what Tony Stark could have become, had circumstances not changed for him. And I have to wonder if Mr. Downey was consciously basing early Tony on that character.
I really want to hear that commentary track.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 02:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 02:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 02:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 02:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 03:00 am (UTC)You and Grissom can watch and munch popcorn together. I'll get together with Archie.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 03:13 am (UTC)Less Than Zero is honestly a little too close to reality, but gritty in the cheezy 80's-ness of it all.
Charlie Bartlett was adorable.
Even if you weren't a fan, he was great in Alley McBeal and the plus is you get to hear him sing. BTW, if you need/want the songs let me know.
And though it's been an age and I was a starry eyed teen 1969 was pretty good if I remember.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 03:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 03:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-10 03:36 am (UTC)