I stuck my neck out back in February at the Berlin Film Festival and said that Vanessa Redgrave will snag a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination (at least) for her galvanizing interpretation of Volumnia in Ralph Fiennes’s hopped-up take on Shakespeare’s “Coriolanus.” I’m sticking to my guns — and I imagine more voices will join mine when the film finally makes its second festival appearance at Toronto next month — but you wouldn’t get the message from this slick, alluring UK trailer, which understandably places the emphasis squarely on the film’s testosterone component. (More thoughts, plus the embed, after the jump.)
The film’s not quite the all-action extravaganza the trailer is selling — if you find yourself referencing “The Hurt Locker,” that’s because ace DP Barry Ackroyd is on board — but it’s a well-conceived and mostly successful update. (As much credit as William Nicholson can claim for this, however, it’s hard not to be a little amused by the trailer’s boast that a Shakespeare adaptation is “from the screenwriter of ‘Gladiator’ and ‘The Last Samurai.’“) Still, second-billed Redgrave is the secret weapon here — I wonder if the Weinsteins’ US trailer will spend a little more time on her. Check it out below and share your thoughts; read my Berlin review here.
(Side note: With a product this literate, it might be an idea to spell “The Independant” correctly.)
Comments
24 responses to “‘Coriolanus’ UK trailer”
“Coriolanus” is one of my favourite B-list Shakespeare plays, so I’ll be interested to see what Fiennes does with it.
Speaking of him, when was the last time he played a role that wasn’t morally ambiguous or outright evil?
Kind of reminds me of the 1995 “Richard III”, which is probably my favorite modernized Shakespeare film ever.
I wonder if there’s any chance she can be pushed as lead. It’s a shame that Redgrave, the greatest living actress by my estimation, doesn’t have a leading actress Oscar.
Wow, between Take Shelter, The Tree of Life, The Help and now this Chastain is approaching Portman’s level of 2011 exposure.
Don’t forget “The Debt” (although most people seem to have).
Zack: Yes, I mention the stylistic kinship with Loncraine’s film — which I think is much better, mind you — in my review.
Mayukh: No, it’s a supporting role — a crucial and substantial one, but by dramatic definition, a supporting role nonetheless.
GlenH: Yes, it’s certainly fuel for the Chastain fire — her ubiquity being part of the reason I’m predicting she’ll score a nod for Take Shelter — but she really has very little to do here.
SC,
Fiennes wasn’t evil or morally ambiguous in The Hurt Locker, but that’s a bit part. Probably The Constant Gardener.
Poor Feinnes. The man gives great work year after year and hasn’t scored a nod in ages. It really is mind-boggling if you think about it.
On ‘Coriolanus’, it doesn’t look like MY type of movie. But it looks impressive, to say the least.
I love Redgrave, always have, & would love to see her get some traction.
On Chastain, unless things really pan out for her … what’s with all the ‘nom’ talk? It seems, on paper, to be a deep year for Supp. Actresses, and I see no slot for her. Is she Lead in ‘Take Shelter’?
No, she’s supporting in Take Shelter, and she’s very good. If Michael Shannon’s campaign takes off — and I’m starting to think it might — she could piggyback on that, so to speak.
Guy: Could Redgrave’s supporting turn in Roland Emmerich’s Anonymous substitute a nomination for her in this film?
not substitute but usurp
I have a hard time imagining a Roland Emmerich film performance usurping the place of anything in an awards race.
SC: I doubt Redgrave will be Razzie worthy for Emmerich’s Anonymous.
I think there’s a lot of room between Oscar-worthy and Razzie-worthy.
Wait, I forgot what I actually wanted to ask:
Guy, just out of curiosity, how is Gerard Butler? I don’t think you mentioned him in your review. I never thought the guy was totally talentless, but he sure has made a concerted effort to make it seem like that’s the case.
I’ll definitely see it. I’m a big fan of anyone who tries to bring Shakespeare to life for contemporary audiences.
Guy, it baffles me that you seem smitten by what I thought was a cookie-cutter concerned supportive wife role from Chastain (which was perfectly fine)? I thought her Tree of Life character was much more interesting.
I’m interested, what did you admire about her Take Shelter performance?
I agree on Butler. Between his shouting in 300 and, yes, shouting in Phantom, it would be easy to write him off as a lucky guy without real chops. I have yet to be blown away by anything he’s had to show us.
/3rtfu11: Obviously, I haven’t seen ‘Anonymous.’ But I still feel confident predicting that neither the role nor the performance is on the scale of her Volumnia here — this is monumental work. (Plus, she has Harvey on her side.)
Liz: He does strong work — he has several scenes where he goes toe-to-toe with Fiennes (whose performance I actually think is wildly inconsistent) and comes out very well. Quite possibly his best performance to date.
Dooby: “Smitten” is a stretch — I probably wouldn’t put her on my own ballot. But I think she finds interesting notes to play in what could be even more of a stock role than the one written — I like the way she plays her uncertainty over her husband’s uncertainty with a slightly accusatory fear, as opposed to simple doe-eyed concern. I don’t think her Tree of Life character is that interesting myself — for me, she operates as an effective symbol there.
Am I the only person who thinks the title of this movie sounds like an uncomfortable medical procedure?…
i can’t see the title card and not think of one of Lionsgate many logos.
The trailer looks great, but Shakespeare or not, this title sucks.
I plan to see this in Toronto if it fits into my schedule. Though it looks pretty violent.
[…] In Contention Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. from → Trailers ← Top 15: Os Melhores […]