MCN Blogs

By DP30 david@thehotbuttonl.com

DP/30: Melancholia, actors Alexander Skarsgard, Kiefer Sutherland

10 Responses to “DP/30: Melancholia, actors Alexander Skarsgard, Kiefer Sutherland”

  1. Joe says:

    Thank you for this.

  2. LexG says:

    AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWESOME.

    Two GODS. Also, not that you guys weren’t gonna see it anyway, but you will BOW to MELANCHOLIA when it comes out… I know it’s hitting VOD first, but I think it’s a bad move because it TOTALLY deserves the full theater treatment with killer sound.

    Masterpiece. Dunst and Gainsbourg absolutely should be nominated.

  3. ThriceDamned says:

    /signed

    Top 5 this year for sure on my list. The film just filled me with an incredible sense of existential dread, if you will, that I’m not sure I’ve ever really felt before to that extent. Just incredible filmmaking and acting across the board.

    Great DP/30…Kiefer has a real presence and gravitas as he gets older. His voice is getting more gravelly, really works for him.

  4. Kelly Griffin Sherwood says:

    Thank you! I look forward to viewing the movie. 8)

  5. DiscoNap says:

    Kiefer would be a great Big Bad for the next (hopefully last?) season of True Blood. Be a nice callback to his Lost Boys breakthrough.

  6. Anna says:

    Love this interview, thank you for posting. I agree with the comment about Kiefer having a real presence and gravitas as he gets older, I think he has really grown into himself as a person and an actor and this interview makes me even more excited to watch for him the future. And Skarsgard is a huge up and coming star – I only hope he doesn’t lose himself in the process as is so easy to do in Hollywood. Can’t wait to see Melancholia.

  7. Guntra says:

    I’m about to watch Melancholia, in a few min… was looking forward to it all summer long (ever since Cannes). this interview makes me even more excited to finally see it, even though I am guessing it’s going to be a heavy watch, just like his other movies are.
    depression per se (becoming more and more sad, desperate and cynical…) is smth I can unfortunately relate to; I am always looking for answers and ways how others are coping with it… rather than just (choosing to) going down.

  8. Guntra says:

    so… I watched it.
    I really feared it will be smth like Antichrist – but it wasn’t. that doesn’t mean it was less hard to watch, haha.

    what a beautiful, beautiful insight into a depressive’s mind… and the lives of those around them. so tortuously real.

  9. sanj says:

    standard dvd commentary – i doubt we’ll see these actors again in at least a year ..

    i really wanted Sutherland to throw the water bottle at DP and do some Jack Baurer stuff .

  10. Mishell says:

    Here’s another take on the movie:
    Melancholia: Lars Von Trier’s “Bleak” House
    http://culturecatch.com/film/melancholia

DP/30

Quote Unquotesee all »

This is probably going to sound petty, but Martin Scorsese insisting that critics see his film in theaters even though it’s going straight to Netflix and then not screening it in most American cities was a watershed moment for me in this theatrical versus streaming debate.

I completely respect when a filmmaker insists that their movie is meant to be seen in the theater, but the thing is, you got to actually make it possible to see it in the theater. Some movies may be too small for that, and that’s totally OK.

When your movie is largely financed by a streaming service and is going to appear on that streaming service instantly, I don’t really see the point of pretending that it’s a theatrical film. It just seems like we are needlessly indulging some kind of personal fantasy.

I don’t think that making a feature film length production that is going to go straight to a video platform is some sort of “step down.“ I really don’t. Theatrical exhibition as we know it is dying off anyway, for a variety of reasons.

I should clarify myself because this thread is already being misconstrued — I’m talking about how the movie is screened in advance. If it’s going straight to Netflix, why the ritual of demanding people see it in the theater?

There used to be a category that everyone recognized called “TV movie” or “made for television movie” and even though a lot of filmmakers considered that déclassé, it seems to me that probably 90% of feature films fit that description now.

Atlantis has mostly sunk into the ocean, only a few tower spires remain above the waterline, and I’m increasingly at peace with that, because it seems to be what the industry and much of the audience wants. We live in an age of convenience and information control.

Only a very elite group of filmmakers is still allowed to make movies “for theaters“ and actually have them seen and judged that way on a wide scale. Even platform releasing seems to be somewhat endangered. It can’t be fought. It has to be accepted.

9. Addendum: I’ve been informed that it wasn’t Scorsese who requested that the Bob Dylan documentary only be screened for critics in theaters, but a Netflix representative indicated the opposite to me, so I just don’t know what to believe.

It’s actually OK if your film is not eligible for an Oscar — we have a thing called the Emmys. A lot of this anxiety is just a holdover from the days when television was considered culturally inferior to theatrical feature films. Everybody needs to just get over it.

In another 10 to 20 years they’re probably going to merge the Emmys in the Oscars into one program anyway, maybe they’ll call it the Contentys.

“One of the fun things about seeing the new Quentin Tarantino film three months early in Cannes (did I mention this?) is that I know exactly why it’s going to make some people furious, and thus I have time to steel myself for the takes.

Back in July 2017, when it was revealed that Tarantino’s next project was connected to the Manson Family murders, it was condemned in some quarters as an insulting and exploitative stunt. We usually require at least a fig-leaf of compassion for the victims in true-crime adaptations, and even Tarantino partisans like myself – I don’t think he’s made a bad film yet – found ourselves wondering how he might square his more outré stylistic impulses with the depiction of a real mass murder in which five people and one unborn child lost their lives.

After all, it’s one thing to slice off with gusto a fictional policeman’s ear; it’s quite another to linger over the gory details of a massacre that took place within living memory, and which still carries a dread historical significance.

In her essay The White Album, Joan Didion wrote: “Many people I know in Los Angeles believe that the Sixties ended abruptly on August 9, 1969, ended at the exact moment when word of the murders on Cielo Drive traveled like brushfire through the community, and in a sense this is true.”

Early in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, as Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt’s characters drive up the hill towards Leo’s bachelor pad, the camera cranes up gently to reveal a street sign: Cielo Drive. Tarantino understands how charged that name is; he can hear the Molotov cocktails clinking as he shoulders the crate.

As you may have read in the reviews from Cannes, much of the film is taken up with following DiCaprio and Pitt’s characters – a fading TV actor and his long-serving stunt double – as they amusingly go about their lives in Los Angeles, while Margot Robbie’s Sharon Tate is a relatively minor presence. But the spectre of the murders is just over the horizon, and when the night of the 9th finally arrives, you feel the mood in the cinema shift.

No spoilers whatsoever about what transpires on screen. But in the audience, as it became clear how Tarantino was going to handle this extraordinarily loaded moment, the room soured and split, like a pan of cream left too long on the hob. I craned in, amazed, but felt the person beside me recoil in either dismay or disgust.

Two weeks on, I’m convinced that the scene is the boldest and most graphically violent of Tarantino’s career – I had to shield my eyes at one point, found myself involuntarily groaning “oh no” at another – and a dead cert for the most controversial. People will be outraged by it, and with good reason. But in a strange and brilliant way, it takes Didion’s death-of-the-Sixties observation and pushes it through a hellfire-hot catharsis.

Hollywood summoned up this horror, the film seems to be saying, and now it’s Hollywood’s turn to exorcise it. I can’t wait until the release in August, when we can finally talk about why.

~ Robbie Collin