Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

55/100

Heavily indulges my least favorite aspect of Leigh's work, viz. his delight in titanically irritating eccentrics. When it's a supporting character, like Timothy Spall's Aubrey in Life Is Sweet, I can just grit my teeth and wait those scenes out; here, Keith is front and center almost continually, and a little of his strident pomposity goes a very long way for me. Imagine an English amalgam of Cliff Claven and Charles Emerson Winchester III, nattering on in his bullying way at feature length with almost zero pushback. Mind you, I'd defend Sloman's performance as superlative—he's expertly unbearable and declines to soften the guy so much as a jot throughout. I just, y'know, kinda couldn't bear him. Candice Marie is far more tolerable (by design), though Steadman takes care to depict her as a passive accomplice rather than merely a long-suffering victim; she also gets to conclude the film on a high note, performing a riotously terrible folk song that prefigures Phoebe's Central Perk performances (to keep the sitcom references going, since that's really the level at which this is pitched). Feared for a while that I might actively dislike Nuts in May, which would be unprecedented for me and Leigh, but the addition of first Ray and then a handful of others shifts its dynamic toward comedy that's not wholly rooted in cringe, and even succeeded in prodding one belly laugh: Keith and Candice Marie lecturing Ray for several minutes about the health hazards of a carnivorous diet, only for Ray to then ask, in seemingly genuine innocence, whether they'd mind if he smokes. Question for my non-existent analyst: Why am I so maddened by hearing two people incessantly, needlessly refer to each other by name? A drinking game in which you down a shot every time Candice Marie ends a sentence with "Keith" would kill every participant before this 81-minute film is even halfway over. 

Files

Comments

Anonymous

Do you know other directors with a similarly large body of work where you've liked every film? (I started scrolling and picked out Wes Anderson, but there were too many cases where there was a film without a rating and I wasn't sure where your cutoff for "liked" was - 50 or 51 or some place less intuitive.)

gemko (edited)

Comment edits

2023-01-23 00:01:21 The way I phrased it, there are probably a fair number—what was unprecedented was my “actively disliking” a Leigh film, by which I meant ‘con’ = &lt; 41. But in fact this is my lowest assigned rating for any of his films, alongside <i>Another Year</i>, which puts all of them at a B- or better. Which is likely fairly rare. That’s Ed, <i>Bleak Moments</i> might well be lower than that and I’m not exactly eager to revisit <i>Career Girls</i>, either. Errol Morris was in the same rarefied class until he made <i>Psychedelic Love Story</i> (a film so weak that most of our Morris-adoring peers never even saw it). Not that many films yet but I’ve actively enjoyed every one of Rian’s thus far, which is remarkable. (Not even the Coens made it to six straight in real time, as I was originally mixed on <i>Fargo</i>.) Don’t think I’ve ever seen a bad Jacques Tourneur film, though <i>Flame and the Arrow</i>’s a little meh. Probably some others.
2023-01-15 06:05:56 The way I phrased it, there are probably a fair number—what was unprecedented was my “actively disliking” a Leigh film, by which I meant ‘con’ = < 41. But in fact this is my lowest assigned rating for any of his films, alongside <i>Another Year</i>, which puts all of them at a B- or better. Which is likely fairly rare. That’s Ed, <i>Bleak Moments</i> might well be lower than that and I’m not exactly eager to revisit <i>Career Girls</i>, either. Errol Morris was in the same rarefied class until he made <i>Psychedelic Love Story</i> (a film so weak that most of our Morris-adoring peers never even saw it). Not that many films yet but I’ve actively enjoyed every one of Rian’s thus far, which is remarkable. (Not even the Coens made it to six straight in real time, as I was originally mixed on <i>Fargo</i>.) Don’t think I’ve ever seen a bad Jacques Tourneur film, though <i>Flame and the Arrow</i>’s a little meh. Probably some others.

The way I phrased it, there are probably a fair number—what was unprecedented was my “actively disliking” a Leigh film, by which I meant ‘con’ = < 41. But in fact this is my lowest assigned rating for any of his films, alongside <i>Another Year</i>, which puts all of them at a B- or better. Which is likely fairly rare. That’s Ed, <i>Bleak Moments</i> might well be lower than that and I’m not exactly eager to revisit <i>Career Girls</i>, either. Errol Morris was in the same rarefied class until he made <i>Psychedelic Love Story</i> (a film so weak that most of our Morris-adoring peers never even saw it). Not that many films yet but I’ve actively enjoyed every one of Rian’s thus far, which is remarkable. (Not even the Coens made it to six straight in real time, as I was originally mixed on <i>Fargo</i>.) Don’t think I’ve ever seen a bad Jacques Tourneur film, though <i>Flame and the Arrow</i>’s a little meh. Probably some others.

Anonymous

Man, what the fuck was up with MY PSYCHEDELIC LOVE STORY anyway? What a waste of time that was.

Anonymous

Scorsese's also got a pretty good batting average considering how many films he's made: 36 films and only 5 with under 55 and none under 50 (though there's a couple of unrated ones).

Anonymous

Counter: which director have you seen the most films by without liking one? Del Toro?

gemko

That’s a good guess. It’d be a huge pain to investigate. Has to be a director whose films I keep being compelled to watch due to completism. Oliveira has exactly one film I like (<i>Oporto of My Childhood</i>), out of a dozen seen. Raoul Ruiz is another possibility, though a lot of his films are unrated. Ooo, Jia. Nope, <i>Xiao Wu</i> (but nothing since).