“Maestro”- Personally, I found it overrated.

Jesus Christ Bradley Cooper and Carey Mulligan aren't getting Oscars for this. If Carey Mulligan couldn't get an Oscar for Promising Young Woman she isn't going to get one in Lead.

Mixed review from the AP

R1 ummm two different movies. That’s like saying “If Leo doesn’t win for The Aviator he is never getting one!”

Lmao. Relax.

Bradley Cooper is an ugly closet case and he looks like a wet rat.

PS I watched it tonight. It was just ok overall. I wasn’t as captivated as some seem to be, honestly.

Ryan Goaling

He directed Gaga in a great performance too. Maybe he is a better director than actor.

I though his version of A Star is Born was sterile and boring and way too long. Hopefully this film is better.

I don’t know if I can take it seriously with the fake nose.

Any dry-humping?

Here you go, R10.

Is that like the male Tar?

I seriously can't believe someone compared Leonardo DiCaprio's stature in Hollywood to Carey Mulligan.

Nah, I'm good...

A nasty talentless closet case who slept his way to the top plays... a nasty closet case who slept his way to the top. Must be amazing to watch.

^^missed the talentless in the second sentence

Carey Mulligan is an actress. A respected one. Leo was a movie star.

He sucks as an actor and sucks as a director.

I personally have never found Bradley to be much of an actor at all. He’s good at comedy but he is very limited and you can watch him acting in most cases. I’ve always been baffled by the praise he gets, and most of his Oscar noms have been laughable.

He gets praised because he is well liked for some reason.

Not liked enough where they actually ever give him the Oscar.

R4 In his movies, whenever they go in for a closeup I think of the line in Tootsie "not too close!" I don't find him attractive at all and he seems needy for an oscar.

R16, Bernstein was hardly "talentless."

Isn't Cooper in the Hollywood AA society?

R24 yea.

R23 agreed. I mean, he composed numerous classics. He was talented. Him being closeted during the time he was isn’t something to look down on him for.

I met Lenny in the late 70s and if that was closeted then I’m from Mars. Perhaps earlier in his life and marriage but not then by a long shot.

In the mid 80s he practically assaulted my best friend who lived in the Dakota at the time.

Mulligan, in my opinion, is one of our best film actors. She's "well regarded" but still underappreciated, it seems to me. Her performance in Wildlife was the best performance by an actor in the last decade, and it barely got noticed. I'll watch this film just for her.

People knew. When I came out in 1974 my mother told me, "You know, Leonard Bernstein is AC/DC." Yes, mom, I know.

Twenty years later a fuck buddy from NYC told me a very drunk Lenny had groped him under the table at dinner with Comden and Green.

Why do you keep making so many accounts? R28. And before you go on your stereotypical rant you always do, yes, I know it’s you.

Everyone, he isn’t even an eldergay. He is also r26 from another account.

Actually, R29, you're wrong. I've had this name for a long time and I'm 72. I have no other DL accounts. And all true.

ZZZzzzzZzzZzzzz

R27 she’s a phenomenal actress. She was even phenomenal in her cameo in Saltburn.

I would have preferred Tony Goldwyn become the handsome Jewish Hollywood hunk, over Bradley.

Lmao not how it works.

George Santos says he was recruited for the part (he being Jewish and all), but he was too busy passing laws and turned it down.

Cooper breaking down his vision for the argument scene. He talks too much.

Tony Goldwyn would actually have been perfect casting.

Lmao r37 no

It will be on Netflix Dec 20.

In the meantime, it’s available at some theaters.

My major takeaway from the trailer is that it made me want a cigarette.

Any nudity?

“Overrated”

Can you just say what you thought about it without comparing it to what you assume everyone dumber than you thought about it?

R42 no.

OP raves about overrated Carey Mulligan but trashes Matt Bomer. Weird

R45 dude. Get a life. Bomer is in the movie for 2 minutes. Enough already.

I've no argument with those who rave about Mulligan. I'll take your word for it.

But Baz Lurhmann perpetrated a major miscasting debacle by choosing her to be Daisy Buchanon.

She simply wasn't pretty enough to be Daisy. And, Mulligan lacked the acting chops to convey Daisy's silky, purring villainy.

Meanwhile everyone loved her as Daisy.

I agree that Carey Mulligan is brilliant. This is her film and she should definitely receive an Oscar nomination. The music is lovely as well.

“Talentless” Bomer just got nominated for a Critics Choice award for Best Actor in Fellow Travelers.

R50 cool. Television is where he belongs.

Cooper is really swinging for the fences with this project. However, I don't think it will get him the Oscar. There is something about him that makes Hollywood want to check that naked ambitious thing he has.

It will very likely go to Carey Mulligan though. I have liked her ever since I first saw her in AN EDUCATION.

I feel like that Killers Moon woman will win even though she shouldn’t.

[quote]The film as a whole is just ok though. It focuses on their marriage (or sham of a marriage) and him being a closeted gay (something she doesn’t know until years into their marriage and post children).

You're wrong. As portrayed in the movie, Felicia was aware of Lenny's proclivities before she married him

[quote]It is well done but mostly slow and could have been told with about 20 minutes shaved off since it focused on just that. It wasn’t about his career so much but his marriage.

To put it mildly. What a disappointment.

[quote]it is Carey Mulligan who truly shines in this film. She is absolutely brilliant in every scene, doesn’t miss a single step.

It's not called "Maestra", now is it?

[quote]Jesus Christ Bradley Cooper and Carey Mulligan aren't getting Oscars for this

Most people don't know that between acting, directing and producing, he hasd nine Oscar nominations. He's due.

He didn’t deserve most of those nominations either

His nomination for American Sniper was laughable.

I want this Oscar for him.

R53 Oppenheimer, Christopher Nolan and Cillian Murphy for the win

R53, You are CORRECT, SIR! [tm Phil Hartman].

It’s now on Netflix

Watched it this morning on Netflix.

Enjoyed it, but it’s not for everyone.

Carey Mulligan’s performance was outstanding.

R46, Did Matt Bomer film scenes that were edited out? His performance is little more than a cameo.

No. Matt Bomer was a cypher in the film. He was never meant to have a big part. The person he plays wasn’t a significant figure in Bernstein’s life. A fuck. That’s what he was. A booty call. They weren’t even in a serious relationship

R64, I've been wondering the same thing, and my guess is yes. I felt like Bohmer was on screen for less than five minutes. His role ended up being significantly smaller than Gideon Glick's, even though Bomer gets very prominent billing but Glick does not.

This is only one of several very weird things about the film, in my opinion. I really did not like it overall, though there are some wonderful moments in it.

Lmao r66 replying to himself 💀

Imagine making a film about Lenny, and choosing to focus on his marriage....deluded.

I was not replying to myself, R67. Step away from the crack pipe.

R69 step away from the screen and get a job.

[quote]Matt Bomer was a cypher in the film. He was never meant to have a big part. The person he plays wasn’t a significant figure in Bernstein’s life. A fuck. That’s what he was. A booty call. They weren’t even in a serious relationship.

Maybe, but the fact remains that Bomer gets very prominent billing in the credits even though his role is tiny. So unless his agent somehow arranged for him to get major billing for what amounts to little more than a cameo role, it's only natural for people to wonder if some of Bomer's scenes filmed but then cut, or perhaps were cut before being filmed.

R70, I have a job, and I expect it's a better one that your job of wiping bodily fluids off of the walls and floors in a sex club :-)

And again, I did not reply to myself above, despite the accusation of someone who can't put down the crack pipe.

Who plays the Asian trade?

[quote] His role ended up being significantly smaller than Gideon Glick's, even though Bomer gets very prominent billing but Glick does not.

Yes, but Bomer's role, small as it was, was much more substantial than Glick's. Glick basically minced in the background of a handful of scenes, whereas Bomer had actual dialogue.

I'lll watch it since it's on Netflix mostly to see Carey Mulligan since so many people really liked her in this. I just wish someone other than Cooper played the lead.

R75 Think it is on Prime.

R71 the prominent billing is due to his agent and people doing a good job at pulling strings to get him placed higher than he should because he has more name recognition than many others in the cast. That is what it comes down to.

I thought Bradley Cooper was much better playing older Lenny than younger Lenny.

R78 agreed. He was better at playing older Lenny. He felt way too affected as younger Lenny.

Was Bomer the guy in bed with Bernstein near the beginning of the movie when he received the phone call about conducting?

Who plays Arthur fucking Laurents?

R80 do your eyes not work? Yes.

Sarah Silverman as Bernstein’s sister, Shirley, who was part of the infamous game show scandal in the 1950s.

“The quiz show scandals began in 1956 when Shirley Bernstein, producer of The $64,000 Challenge, gave answers to Rev. Storey Jackson.“

R82, The scene is filmed in B&W shadow, his face is not clearly seen and he has no dialogue, cunt.

[quote]Yes, but Bomer's role, small as it was, was much more substantial than Glick's. Glick basically minced in the background of a handful of scenes, whereas Bomer had actual dialogue.

I don't really agree with that. Bomer has very little dialogue, and he disappears from the movie completely after the first half hour or so, whereas Glick is in several scenes in the latter part of the movie (after it switches from black and white to color, and don't get me started on that). His role seems more prominent for that reason, even though it's true that he too has very little dialogue. Also, Glick's role seems more prominent because his character is more or less depicted as the gay lover who causes the rift between Lenny and Felicia.

He disappears from the movie because he was nothing more than a fuck buddy for Lenny. Like all fuck buddies, your shelf life is limited. Lenny moved on.

I saw the opening scenes of MAESTRO twice in close succession (they had to start the movie again at the screening I attended, due to a technical problem), and both times I was not sure that the guy in bed with Lenny at the beginning was Bomer. For some reason, it didn't really look like him to me, maybe because of the lighting and the angle at which his face was shot.

R87 or just get your eyes checked.

[quote]The prominent billing is due to his agent and people doing a good job at pulling strings to get him placed higher than he should because he has more name recognition than many others in the cast. That is what it comes down to.

You may be right about all of that. Regardless, I think it's odd for an actor to receive very prominent billing for a movie if he only appears in two or three very brief scenes towards the beginning, and has very little dialogue in them. I seem to remember that Bomer's name appears third in the cast credits at the end of MAESTRO, right after Mulligan's and Cooper's. When I saw that, I was very surprised, and my immediate thought was that maybe some of his scenes had been cut.

R88, I will if you get your cunt checked :-)

R89 it’s not strange nor is it something new in film.

R91, No, not new at all.

R91 and R92, I myself can think of several examples of famous actors appearing in very small roles or even cameos in films, BUT I can't think of any examples of anyone receiving very prominent billing in the credits for doing so. If you can, please give us some examples.

Matt Bomer isn’t as big an actor as you seem to think r93 lmao. It’s embarrassing

R93, Anne Francis’ scenes were cut by William Wyler in “Funny Girl” and she received prominent billing.

She was so angry, she tried to have her name removed from the credits.

Anna Paquin was cut out of the original release of Days of Future Past and still billed high.

[quote]Matt Bomer isn’t as big an actor as you seem to think [R93] lmao.

Regardless of how big he is or isn't, the point is that his BILLING was very prominent for a tiny role.

[quote]Anne Francis’ scenes were cut by William Wyler in “Funny Girl” and she received prominent billing.

Yes, exactly -- she received prominent billing because that was contracted when her role was meant to be considerably larger. Similar to the way Amanda Blake received prominent billing for the Judy Garland version of A STAR IS BORN even though her part was cut down to, I believe, one very short, passing appearance on screen with no dialogue at all.

P.S. I'm glad that some people who post on DL know how to read, because the two I'm quoting here obviously don't.

But look at the film as a whole. Outside of Cooper and Mulligan, no one had a role that was that large. Everyone had basically the same amount of screen time after them, give or take a scene. It could have been Bomer, who had four scenes, it could have been Silverman, who had about the same amount, and then it's a bunch of no-names throughout the movie.

So giving Bomer third billing isn't exactly an affront to any of the other actors. He's the biggest name in there after the two leads.

You have a point, R98, except that Silverman's role seemed much, much larger to me than Bomer's. For that matter, even the role of Bernstein's daughter Jamie seemed larger.

R98 exactly. As stated upthread. It’s not hard to understand but of course that specific poster can’t understand. He understands nothing.

Silverman and Hawke's roles seemed larger because they were spread out more. Bomer's scenes were all front loaded and he was out of the film by the end of the first act. Trust me, the three of them all had comparable screen time.

I hated the movie, and think it's a gigantic fraud in every way.

R100, I was not the only person, or even the first person in this thread, to question the size of Matt Bomer's billing relative to the size of his tiny role. That said, R98 does make the good point that very few other actors in the film had roles significantly larger than Bomer's.

I didn’t like the movie either.

[quoted]I hated the movie, and think it's a gigantic fraud in every way.

Although I think maybe your negative feelings towards the movie are a bit stronger than mine, I'm basically very much in agreement with you.

And yes, I agree that a small role with scenes spread over the entirety of a film's length is going to seem much larger than a role that has a comparable amount of screen time but is limited to only a small part of the film. One of the greatest examples of this is Margaret Hamilton as the Wicked Witch in THE WIZARD OF OZ as compared to, say, Charley Grapewin as Uncle Henry.

Sorry.....

[quote]I hated the movie, and think it's a gigantic fraud in every way.

Although I think maybe your negative feelings towards the movie are a bit stronger than mine, I'm basically very much in agreement with you.

And yes, I agree that a small role with scenes spread over the entirety of a film's length is going to seem much larger than a role that has a comparable amount of screen time but is limited to only a small part of the film. One of the greatest examples of this is Margaret Hamilton as the Wicked Witch in THE WIZARD OF OZ as compared to, say, Charley Grapewin as Uncle Henry.

Bomer has less than 5 minutes of screentime. Mostly everyone but the leads does.

I am struggling with this film because the performances are so mannered. Bradley Cooper especially seems to be playing a crazy puppet, not a real person.

Is it true that BC got circumcised for the film, or did he use a stunt cock?

Not very impressed. Watch Lenny conducting Ave verum corpus (a few weeks before he died) on YouTube if you want to be captivated. The Mahler Resurrection scene was good.

Carey Mulligan is good but overall the movie is a dud. It’s too long, too boring, has too many artsy shots, and Bradley is mannered and acting alone. The gay characters barely register.

Watched it tonight and thought it was just average. For Lenny, I could only hear Bradley's actual voice. It was distracting. Maybe it was just me.

After Tar and Maestro, maybe we can put the classical music conductor movies on permanent hiatus.

I’ve never understood the importance of a conductor, other than telling the orchestra when to be begin playing.

After that, why is a conductor necessary?

The members of the orchestra know what to do, just follow the sheet music in front of them.

I think, and I may be ignorant, but I always thought a conductor was like a “music producer” of classical music.

I don’t want to watch it because it’s annoying that gay movies still have to have romantic leading women in them.

Conductors act as guides to the orchestras or choirs they conduct. They choose the works to be performed and study their scores, to which they may make certain adjustments (such as in tempo, articulation, phrasing, repetitions of sections), work out their interpretation, and relay their vision to the performers. They also target impressionable young people as sexual partners.

I watched it early this morning and I agree with everything OP said. It wasn't as impressive as I thought it would. There wasn't a lot of other derails about his life, and I think that was a mistake.

The New Yorker said it left out the most significant events of his life and career. It bugged me that not one character is fully fleshed out.

Yes, that's it R117. The characters aren't fleshed out.

Carey Mulligan is astonishing. And Bradley Cooper blew my mind as an actor and a director. I think this is in fact a modern masterpiece.

Sarah Silverman looked good in clips I've seen.

Who's thirstier for an Oscar, Bradley Cooper or Greta Gerwig?

It'll be funny watching Bradley lose again.

I loved it but I also love his music and Carey Mulligan so...

[quote] Carey Mulligan is astonishing. And Bradley Cooper blew my mind as an actor and a director. I think this is in fact a modern masterpiece.

you must be a super easy lay.

[quote]Carey Mulligan is astonishing. And Bradley Cooper blew my mind as an actor and a director. I think this is in fact a modern masterpiece.

You're not fooling anybody, Bradley, go sit down somewhere.

A Datalounger had to have written this:

Sad elder-gay Lenny letting loose to Tears for Fears a pleasurable respite amid all the officially sanctioned bio-dreck.

R119 = Rex Reed

Pictured, is the real David Oppenheim, who Matt Bomer plays in the movie.

“As a young man in New York in the early 1940s, Oppenheim was a close friend of Leonard Bernstein. Oppenheim was married three times. His first marriage was to actress Judy Holliday, from 1948 to 1957. Oppenheim struggled with his sexual orientation; Leonard Bernstein, a mutual friend and sometime lover, suggested that Oppenheim marry Holliday as a beard.”

Carey Mulligan steals the picture.

I swear I read that Cooper had no idea who Bernstein was before he took on this project, which, if true, is pretty astounding.

R129, It’s hard to believe that a 48 year old man who was raised in the NYC area and has been in show business for over 20 years would not be aware of who Leonard Bernstein was.

r130, Bradley Cooper was raised in suburban Philadelphia.

R131, “raised in the NYC area“, 94 miles away.

Duh!

It was interesting but a little flat- the long dialogues seemed indulgent rather than helpful to the film. I’ve always been ambivalent about Bernstein the person- not as if I knew him. I did meet him and found him to be pleasant but sort of suck the air out of the room kind of guy- and definitely a randy older homo. I also felt a little sorry for Felicia. His talent was huge and his progressive activism admirable. Cooper captures his apparent appetite to have it all- even at the cost of others- but that’s not enough to counter the flat pace.

If you’re aware of Bernstein’s career, you’ll appreciate the movie much more.

A relative worked at Symphony Hall in Boston for many years.

Lenny would always arrive wearing a flowing cape, with a young, attractive, male “assistant” at his side.

R112, I sincerely hope you're joking.

[quote]The movie is a dud. It’s too long, too boring, has too many artsy shots

What's worse, the "artsy shots" and fantasy sequences are all front-loaded in the first part of the movie, during the black-and-white scenes. Then they stop. So where's the consistency?

To me, the arbitrary use of black and white for the early scenes and color for the later ones, plus the artsy shots you mention, plus the pointless decision to shoot the whole movie in an old, squarish aspect ratio -- all these things reek of pretension.

[quote]Carey Mulligan is astonishing. And Bradley Cooper blew my mind as an actor and a director. I think this is in fact a modern masterpiece.

I agree with your first two points, but I still think the movie is a tremendous disappointment because of its relentless focus on the relationship between Lenny and Felicia while leaving out so much of what made Bernstein a genius.

R136, Watch any orchestral video.

The members of the orchestra do not even look at the conductor during the performance.

R138, Many were expecting a biographical film, which it is not.

Rather, it’s a look at the complicated Bernstein marriage.

Incorrect, R139. They do not stare directly at the conductor throughout, but they often look at him/her directly for entrances and cutoffs, etc., plus they can see him/her in their peripheral vision.

Small groups like string quartets don't need conductors. In those cases, one of the members of the group gives entrances and cutoffs, and sometimes helps set the tempo. :Large orchestras CAN play without conductors, at least for brief periods and once the starting entrance has been given and the tempo has been set, but a conductor is necessary for all of the above and much more -- indicating that the entire orchestra or certain sections of it should play more loudly or more softly, setting tempos and easing transitions from one tempo to the next, etc.

I hope you can now understand, and that I haven't wasted my time in trying to explain to you the need for an orchestra to have a conductor.

Yes, R140, but I (and others) feel that was a huge mistake. It's as if no one had ever made a movie about Beethoven, then someone decided to do so and focused on his personal life, but only mentioned the FIfth Symphony, the Ninth Symphony, the Moonlight Sonata, etc. in passing and included only brief excerpts of those and other great Beethoven works on the soundtrack, with literally only two or three scenes of his music being performed.

Also, and I'm sure you disagree, but I don't think MAESTRO is even successful on its own terms as a film about a complicated marriage, because it focuses SO MUCH attention there that it begins s to seem like a soap opera, and it becomes quite boring in certain sections.

As for putting so much focus on Mulligan's character that Mulligan gets first billing in the final credits: I'm sure Felicia Montealegre was quite a compelling and interesting personality, as she's portrayed here, but if she had married a gay or bisexual accountant from Westchester, l sincerely doubt that anyone would have made a movie about her.

My, aren’t we a condescending cunt this morning, R141.

R142, And if Eva Duarte had not married Juan Perón, I seriously doubt anyone would have made a movie about her.

R143, is it "condescending" to explain something that someone can't understand (in this case, the function of a conductor) even though most other people in the world seem to understand it very well?

Bradley claims he was given a conductor baton as a child. Sounds made up.

The movie is a long slog.

R147, I think it seems long not because of the actual length, but because having scene after scene about the Lenny/Felicia relationship eventually becomes tiresome.

[quote] If you’re aware of Bernstein’s career, you’ll appreciate the movie much more.

Why, because you've already done all the work for Cooper so he can tell a story no one is interested in?

R149 . . .

Don't make stupid statements.

I don't think R149 is an asshole at all. On the contrary, I think there's a very good point to that post.

I am a classical music fan (especially Mahler), and grew up watching Bernstein on TV talking about music in very engaging ways. I am totally the kind of person who would disparage a bio-pic like this. Not a big Cooper fan in anything.

But I was surprised at how much the movie drew me in. As has been observed, the movie was about the marriage, not the career. But through the movie there was Bernstein's music (compositions) from all through his career. It reminded me of his importance as a composer, more than just the flamboyant conductor.

Mulligan is one of the most talented living actors - and she was spectacular. BC impressed me - the young scattered and fey man changed as he grew older. I did get the sense of "a life lived." But oddly, there didn't seem the necessary chemistry between Mulligan and Cooper. They did the Altman thing of talking at the same time, but they didn't really seem connected. It should have gone even more into the grit of the marriage... and Bernstein's shadow selves lived out in the open. I loved the scene where he talked to the young baby and said ",,,and I've slept with both of your parents, what do you think about that??" NY in the 50s, 60s, 70s... in the arts.... was a unique universe. BC tried to capture it, and just sort of missed. It wasn't the direction I think, I just think the script wandered around looking for a reason to exist.

But very worth watching.

R152, Don’t you have ANYTHING else to do but post inane comments?

Seriously, is your life that empty?

You’re to be pitied.

Bradley is gay so like Jodie Foster, his heterosexual movie pairings are unbelievable.

[quote] [R152], Don’t you have ANYTHING else to do but post inane comments? Seriously, is your life that empty? You’re to be pitied.

Honey, you are all over this thread, so you might want to look in the mirror when you say that.

There were several subtle nods meant as a shout out to the gays like when BC as Lenny takes off his socks and smells them. Many feets shots. I am convinced BC is going to come out after this; he's hiding in plain sight.

[quote]There were several subtle nods meant as a shout out to the gays like when BC as Lenny takes off his socks and smells them.

How is that "a shout out to the gays," r157?

Mulligan is extraordinary, and Cooper is quite good, but their affected accents are just bizarre, even if that's how the real Leonard Benstein and Felicia Montealegre spoke. Very early on I realized Mulligan was doing Montealegre's voice exactly like Charles Busch when he plays a grand lady putting on airs (like in "Die, Mommie, Die!" when his character Angela Arden is being pretentious), and sometimes, as in the Edward R. Murrow interview, Cooper sounded like Martin Short as Ed Grimley.

I don't see either of them getting the Oscar, though--Mulligan will lose to Lily Gladstone or Fantasia, and Cooper will lose to Cillian Murphy.

The technical sides are the best parts of the film, and I hope it is nominated for cinematography (especially), editing, and direction. The problem though is that the movie isn't really about anything. It's only about being a show-off, which is what attracted Cooper to it in the first place--Bernstein was the ultimate show-off, and Montealegre was a frustrated show-off who came early in her career to realize her limitations. That's not much to hand a movie on.

I wish there were an award for Mahler to receive.

Sterile is a good word for this. The movie has several excellent scenes, but Cooper keeps the audience at arm’s length throughout so I never felt moved or interested in these characters except clinically. Mulligan’s performance is actressy and seems to always be pleading with the audience for sympathy. And the fact that she is the central character unbalances the movie, which never sits right and always seems off-kilter. And despite the smart talk and striking visuals and a good performance from Cooper, “Maestro” is often dull.

Bradley thought this would be his slam dunk for Oscar. Needy bottom,

[quote]The technical sides are the best parts of the film, and I hope it is nominated for cinematography (especially), editing, and direction.

What is your interpretation as to why the hell the whole damn movie was shot in an outmoded, nearly square aspect ratio? Has Cooper himself made any pronouncement about his reasoning for this?

The character called “ Tommy” is clearly meant to be Michael Tilson Thomas since he looks just like him and Thomas was known to be a lover/protege to Bernstein. So why is he given a fake name in the credits? Did Tilson object to being included? Did they even need his permission?

Well, R164, i wouldn't say he looks "just like him." In my opinion, the young Michael Tilson Thomas was far cuter than Gideon Glick. Still, your post is very intriguing.

Cooper goes on and on in the film about what a big star Felicia Montealegre was. News to me, as I've never heard of her, and I would wager 98% of the people watching hadn't, either. Fine, no problem, but then give us some sort of frame of reference we can wrap our heads around for us to understand how famous she was, because doing a really lame duet with another no-name, two hours into the film on an unidentified variety show tells me nothing. Actually, what it tells me (whether or not it's true) is that Cooper is lying to me by hyping how famous and independent she really was. And if he's lying to me for story purposes, he failed, because he never betrayed the lie.

Mulligan's performance was so artificial to me. Yes, I understand there are people like that who are "on" all the time. But if you're going to make them the focus of your film, you've got to let them drop the act at some point so we can see inside of them. Mulligan never lets the artifice go, and there were a few occasions already built into the script where her character could have been allowed to do just that. I don't know if that's Cooper's fault or Mulligan's fault or a combination of both.

I saw the movie two weeks ago and the more I think about it, the more I dislike it.

[quote] Cooper sounded like Martin Short as Ed Grimley.

Sorry--I meant Short as Jackie Rogers, Jr.

It's such a bizarre film--it has almost no point to it. The central characters are so incredibly articulate about their emotional problems you don't really need to watch them experiencing their feelings. They tell you everything they feel.

[quote] Sorry--I meant Short as Jackie Rogers, Jr.

I said that a while back. Glad to hear someone else heard it, too.

Were the Bernstein children heavily involved in the production of this? They seemed pretty much idealized. They were always so understanding of everything, just wanting to act out little Shirley Ellis songs to cheer up their sad parents..

[quote]I said that a while back. Glad to hear someone else heard it, too.

In the Murrow interview Bernstein employs one of Jackie Rogers Jr's classic repeated catchphrases ("I must say"), so that with the cheesy mid-Atlantic accent reminded me of Short's Rogers.

I actually had not read your comment (nor the rest of the thread) when I posted--in fact, had I done so and wanted to steal it (why would I?), I then would not have made the mistake of attributing the voice to Ed Grimley instead of JR, Jr.

R166, You made the effort to see the movie two weeks ago at a theater, so you were obviously anxious to see it.

And two weeks later, you’re still dwelling on how much you disliked the film?

Seriously?

Jamie attaches herself to every project connected to her Father.

meh

Is Matt Bomer into foot play IRL?

Did anyone notice any allusion to the fact that Bernstein went off and lived with Tom in California for several months?

R159, Glad to see another confident about Cillian!

I have always thought that Fantasia is awesome, but this will be the Academy's Mea Culpa to Native Americans, aka Lily Gladstone will win Best Actress.

As for Cinematography: Yeah, give this one to "Oppenheimer," too.

[quote] I actually had not read your comment (nor the rest of the thread) when I posted--in fact, had I done so and wanted to steal it (why would I?), I then would not have made the mistake of attributing the voice to Ed Grimley instead of JR, Jr.

Oh, no, no, no. I wasn't accusing you of stealing my comment. I just said that I mentioned it a while back, and that I was glad someone else heard it (in the movie) as well. I was agreeing with you.

[quote] You made the effort to see the movie two weeks ago at a theater, so you were obviously anxious to see it. And two weeks later, you’re still dwelling on how much you disliked the film? Seriously?

First of all, I didn't go see it in a theater. I'm an Academy voter and it's been on the Academy streaming channel for a couple weeks. It wasn't much effort to click a button.

Second of all, it's called a thought process and a discussion. As in, I've been thinking about the film as a gay man and a theater and music lover and have been more and more annoyed about what Cooper chose to dwell on. Plus, I'm having- you know, like what you're attempting (poorly I might add) to do in here- a discussion, which has been ongoing, about the film. So yes, when I do engage about it on here, it actually causes me to think about it. Do you need me to break it down even more simply for you?

OP Personally, I found Cooper's A Star is Born to be overrated.

I would give it a negative review for many of the reasons stated above. The movie drags and it is too sketchy (I know it is a biopic, but still). I thought the whole "On the Town" scene where they get on the stage was bizarre. And also that, almost no mentions of WSS and its success. I would say that WSS is the main reason he is well known in Europe. He is a great conductor but, in terms of the greats, Klemperer, Bohm and many others would be placed higher than LB. Anyway, not a movie I might need to rewatch anytime soon.

You are truly insufferable, R176.

How can anyone bear to be in your presence?

You’re a condescending, pompous bore.

I agree with the above sentiments…it was okay but it was so “this film is important” that is actually was less so.

I tried to watch and couldn’t get past 10 minutes - too much smoking, it was annoying and distracting and utterly disgusting. Blech.

I can't stand Carey Mulligan (she just has one of "those" faces); however, I have to, very begrudgingly, have to give her praise for her role here, especially when she plays the older Felicia.

R181 you’re immature.

The movie was awful. The black and white parts were still life. You CANNOT ignore the fact it’s Brad Cooper with a big fake nose. His eyes look extra crazy. Everything’s a close up. Slooooow. Boring. A Brad cooper fest that nobody asked for. What a waste of a subject. Just a shitty movie! I wonder if Bradley saw himself in the story. What with being so closeted..

Peoole like R179 should be banned from social media. Seriously. R176's response to the bitchery of R171 (who I'm guessing is also R179) was very articulate and 100 percent reasonable, and only very slightly condescending -- not as much as would have been justified.

I generally avoid putting posters here on ignore because that can make a thread incoherent (even if more pleasant), but I think I'm going to make an exception for this witch, who may well be the same one who always attacks other posters as "insufferable."

I can never take Datalounge reviews of anything seriously. You people hate EVERYTHING.

[quote]Mulligan's performance was so artificial to me. Yes, I understand there are people like that who are "on" all the time. But if you're going to make them the focus of your film, you've got to let them drop the act at some point so we can see inside of them. Mulligan never lets the artifice go, and there were a few occasions already built into the script where her character could have been allowed to do just that. I don't know if that's Cooper's fault or Mulligan's fault or a combination of both.

I agree with everything else in your post, but I have to partly disagree here. I thought there were several scenes in which she let he artifice go, most notably the quarrel scene during the Macy's parade and, of course, her death scene.

[quote]I saw the movie two weeks ago and the more I think about it, the more I dislike it.

Me too.

[quote] I generally avoid putting posters here on ignore because that can make a thread incoherent (even if more pleasant), but I think I'm going to make an exception for this witch, who may well be the same one who always attacks other posters as "insufferable."

You would be correct.

[quote] I agree with everything else in your post, but I have to partly disagree here. I thought there were several scenes in which she let he artifice go, most notably the quarrel scene during the Macy's parade and, of course, her death scene.

I can see that. I still felt that, up until the death scene, she was still being performative, but to wait until her last scene to give her just a shred of a peek of who she was, was not enough. Look at something like Precious. Mo'nique played the mother as a total monster, and you hated her. But her final scene, she became vulnerable and, while it certainly didn't justify the abuse, you understood that there was a real, damaged person underneath all that. But that was a scene that really went in depth and explored that character. And I feel like Cooper didn't give that to Felicia. And not having been part of the process, of course, I can't say that Mulligan didn't push back and ask for more colors to Felicia and was rejected. I definitely think it would serve Cooper well to not be part of the writing process on the next film he directs.

I liked him as an actor in 'Silver Linings Playbook', 'American Hustle', and 'Limitless'. As a director - meh. His thirst is unbecoming and desperate. It's embarrassing.

R189, I see your point as well, and there is at least one scene in the movie that I think would have been far more effective if Mulligan's performance in it had been more sincere and less performative: The scene in which Felicia and Bernstein's sister have a heart-to-heart about her marriage to Lenny. I think maybe she dropped the artifice a LITTLE in that scene, but she could have gone further.

I liked Cooper's work as both writer and director of A STAR IS BORN so much that I was all the more disappointed by his work on MAESTRO in those capacities. In particular, I can't believe more critics (and audiences) haven't given him grief for the pretentious nonsense of shooting part of the movie in black and white and part in color, but all of it in that ridiculous aspect ratio.

This project reminded me of "Fosse/Verdon"--again, here we have a great mid-century theatrical and musical genius, but the story we get is of the least interesting part about his: his family life.

Yes, I honestly think the feeling now is that no one can make a movie about a famous white man without making it equally about a woman or a POC. And I'm very serious about that.

I had no problem with so much of Gwen Verdon being included in FOSSE/VERDON, but the way Fosse was minimized and reduced to a one-note character in the process was pretty ridiculous.

Why are so many having difficulty in understanding that “Maestro” is not a biographical film much like “Being the Ricardos” wasn’t?

“Maestro” focuses on a factor in Bernstein’s life, his complicated, tumultuous relationship with his wife.

If you want a biographical movie, try “Yankee Doodle Dandy”.

R194 He wanted to fuck men, not her.

R195, Still, we’re here.

[quote]Why are so many having difficulty in understanding that “Maestro” is not a biographical film much like “Being the Ricardos” wasn’t? “Maestro” focuses on a factor in Bernstein’s life, his complicated, tumultuous relationship with his wife.

It's not that we have difficulty understanding this, it's that we think it was an incredibly stupid decision to make a movie like that about a genius like Bernstein while severely downplaying or passing over his genius accomplishments as a composer, conductor, and educator.

R197, There are numerous documentaries on YouTube and elsewhere that cover Bernstein’s complete career.

And what does that have to do with anything, R198? That fact doesn't justify MAESTRO barely mentioning WEST SIDE STORY and not including even part of one song from that score being sung in the movie, not to mention all of the other brilliant artistic accomplishments of his life that were left out. I mean, Cooper actually made the incredibly strange decision to include a sequence of Felicia's appearance on some TV show but not even a few seconds of Bernstein in action at one of his famous Young People's Concerts. Absolutely bizarre.

I won't put this shit on even while going to bed. How did it get made?

R199, IT WAS NOT A BIOGRAPHICAL FILM!

Whatever the fuck it was, it sucked ass.

Is there a thread on Bernstein's gay life , hook-ups, etc?

He squeezed the cheek of a friend of mine in an elevator in Vienna in the late 80z (“such a cutie”)

Which cheek, r204?

The left one. My friend had never met him before.

Didn't quite answer my question, r206.

[quote] Why are so many having difficulty in understanding that “Maestro” is not a biographical film much like “Being the Ricardos” wasn’t?

Because there's never been a biopic of Bernstein and it would have been a great opportunity to introduce current generations to his work. Being the Ricardos can get away with a slice of life film because everyone already know the story of Lucy and Desi, and if they don't, there have been multiple tv movies made about them, books written about them, tv specials, etc. It's a well trod story, unlike Bernstein's.

R208 obviously missed R198.

I said BIOPIC not documentary. There's a big difference.

R210, A biopic on Leonard Bernstein would not make a dime.

“Maestro” is not going to be a moneymaker, either.

Just shut up already, R211. Everyone loathes you.

Merry Christmas!, R212.

[quote] I hope you can now understand, and that I haven't wasted my time in trying to explain to you the need for an orchestra to have a conductor.

Oh Mary, who on Earth do you possibly think you're fooling. You're spending your precious time on a gay gossip forum.

Get OVER yourself.

R194, The fault, dear Brutus, lies not with us, but with the title: "Maestro."

One might be forgiven if one expected to see a film mostly about the career of Bernstein, as a MAESTRO.

He was NOT a "maestro" in his role of (closeted husband.

Of course, "Lenny" was taken. But maybe, IDK, "Marriage and the Maestro"?

R215, "Maestro" was how some addressed Bernstein, though most called him Lenny. The vanity license plate on his car read MAESTRO, which is depicted in the movie.

Bradley rehearses conducting Mahler's Second with Yannick Nezet Seguin. At some point, did Yannick get up and demonstrate [italic]im tempo des scherzos[/italic] with a little reach from behind?

Is the title "Ego" taken?

Leggo my ego!

Someone upthread said they don’t understand the role of a conductor. wtf. It’s to CONDUCT the orchestra. An important role. They aren’t just waving their hands. The direction they wave their hand communicates what they want from the orchestra, from how hard or soft they play to the speed they play, if they need to go higher or need to go lower, etc.

I attended Bernstein’s star studded 70th birthday gala at Tanglewood in 1988.

He sat in the audience throughout the concert and when he joined the performers onstage at the end, he donned a nearly floor length cape, which seemed odd on such a warm evening.

His daughter Jamie revealed in her book that he wore the cape to cover the fact that he had pissed himself during the concert and he needed to cover the urine stains.

R220, All of that information is written on the sheet music in front of each player. Bernstein often looked ridiculous when he conducted, with his over the top mannerisms.

R222 wrong. And you can’t have an ORCHESTRA, which consists of many people playing different instruments, without someone leading them. Stupid. Fucking. Comment. And proof you know nothing about music, films, acting, anything. Yet you’re the loudest on here at all times.

Stop embarrassing yourself, R223.

Any musician who can read sheet music is able to play their instrument without someone waving a baton at them.

It’s all on the page, tempo, play higher, play lower, extend the note, lol.

You have absolutely no idea what you’re espousing.

R223, MARY!

R224, actually you are wrong. Good conductors make orchestras create better music,

R224 only you are wrong.

R226 . . .

“But the musicians all have scores before them that tell them what to play. If you took the conductor away, could the orchestra manage on its own?“

YES!

R228 stop speaking of subjects you know nothing about. End of discussion.

Bless your delusional heart, R229.

R230 you must not know what delusional means.

Well, I just finished watching.

Strange film. Doesn’t really tell one tale, and the many stories it wants to tell seem hardly connected. Bradle’s Lenny didn’t seem too torn about being gay/bi, so that narrative went out of the window within the first 20 minutes.

It wants to be something, but it desperately lacks depth.

Bradley Cooper was a poor choice to play him, in my opinion. He's just not that good.

He cast himself.

One of the worst things about “Maestro” is the dishonesty of it. If you read the Wikipedia entry on Felicia, she and Bernstein broke up shortly after becoming engaged and she had an intense, years-lomg affair with actor Richard Hart (Lana Turner’s co-star in “Green Dolphin Street”). Hart died young of a heart attack in Felicia’s arms and she married Bernstein the same year. Rebound maybe?

Also it is mentioned in passing that Bernstein’s male lover, the one played by Matt Bomer, also gets married and has a baby. That lover was named David Oppenheim (who also has a Wikipedia entry) and his first wife was actress Judy Holliday, who had also dated Bernstein, because both men, who were getting higher cultural profiles in Mnhattan cultural circles, were actively looking for beards.

The movie makes it look like these two fell in love at first sight, and while I’m sure after decades of marriage and three children they had a true bond between them, there was surely a lot of calculation on both sides going into the relationship. Felicia was certainly aware of Lenny’s desire for men, but her grief at losing a lover and her awareness that Bernstein’s star was on the rise must have been enhancements. And while there were many gay men in the world of classical music, Bernstein’s breakthrough as a cultural superstar my not have been quite so meteoric without a cultured wife by his side dropping a kid every couple of years . . .

[quote]Stop embarrassing yourself, [R223]. Any musician who can read sheet music is able to play their instrument without someone waving a baton at them. It’s all on the page, tempo, play higher, play lower, extend the note, lol.

And what about when 80 musicians are playing together - or even 50, or even 25? Can you not understand why a conductor might be necessary under those circumstances, you cretin?

[quote]You have absolutely no idea what you’re espousing.

Glass houses......

R216, Fine. Note I offered a title with it.

For the supremely ignorant r222/r224:

R194, The title "Being the Ricardos" explicitly made clear what the subject was: How Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz were immensely successful as fictional characters.

I was surprised about the "On The Town" sequence with Bradley dancing. Why?

“Felicia gradually started to resent Tommy, as per Burton’s book, as he became an unavoidable presence in her husband’s life. Eventually, she gave Bernstein an ultimatum to choose between her and Tommy, only for the musician to choose the latter. “My mother [Felicia] was a fairly conventional lady and so she expected to be treated like one. The deal was that he would be discreet and that she would maintain her dignity. And then he was not discreet [Felicia found him in bed with his lover, a young music researcher, Tom Cothran, whom he had met in San Franciso in 1973], and so that was that,” Nina, Bernstein and Felicia’s third child, told HuffPost about her parents’ separation.

Bernstein and Tommy then started to live together. “In August and September 1976, he [Bernstein] and Cothran spent six weeks together in Carmel, on the Pacific Ocean between Los Angeles and San Francisco. While they sang and swam and read poetry, in Bernstein’s mind gingerly testing the possibility of making a permanent life together, Felicia was going through hell at Martha’s Vineyard. She could not come to terms with her husband’s defection,” Burton’s book reads. After leaving California, they lived together in New York City. They also visited Paris together. “With Tom Cothran at his side, he [Bernstein] moved on to Paris, where he could fantasize about being Oscar Wilde to Cothran’s Lord Alfred Douglas,” the author added.

Bernstein and Tommy ended up becoming incompatible, which made living together tougher. According to Burton’s biography, Tommy had a “voracious sexual appetite” while sex for Bernstein was often “an adjunct to the game of conquest as well as an end in itself.” “In mid-February, Bernstein returned precipitately to New York. He told [his manager] Harry Kraut it was impossible for him to live with Cothran and he wanted a reconciliation with Felicia,” ‘Leonard Bernstein’ reads. Still, the “two men parted without rancor and remained close.””

I Didn't get that bit either, R240. Was she hallucinating?

Thanks for sharing that, R241. Interesting read.

Why compare a film to Being the Ricardos when that film sucked?

R235 R241 Actually all that matches what the movies showed me (e.g. Bernstein meeting the Oppenheimers in the park with their baby - Lenny saying to baby out loud in public "I slept with both your parents!"). The movies didn't quite decide what it wanted to be (the several posts in this thread confirms this as DL's consensus opinion), but Lenny's need for homo-sex and Felicia's "accommodation" to it was central to the story.

R241 Thanks for the stories - I could see a lovely movie about Lenny and Tommy in Carmel... coming together in passionate love, hiking and fucking in Big Sur, Tommy "straying" with soldiers in Monterey. Somebody write the script.

R245, I very much doubt that Lenny would have publicly kissed a man on Central Park West in the 1950s. That scene was wrong.

Agreed, R246. I suppose Cooper might justify it by saying that Lenny was famous for kissing lots of people, men and women, at the drop of a half. Though I expect he didn't start kissing men in public till later in life, after doing so became more acceptable. But, you're right, not on Central Park West in the 1950s.

LB’s musical and theatrical “lives” were far more interesting than his marriage. I’d much rather have seen a film which focused on those.

Haven't read the thread yet (will go back now), but I loved it. Frankly, I am shocked by how much I loved it. I was hooked from the first shot. The story was riveting, complicated, gorgeously shot.

I was also hoping we'd see a bit of "the creation of West Side Story", behind-the-scenes drama, rehearsals... But.. nothing. The thing he is most known for with the broader public was mentioned exactly once by his beard, and that was it.

R249 you forgot to sign your post with "B. Cooper"

[quote]I was also hoping we'd see a bit of "the creation of West Side Story", behind-the-scenes drama, rehearsals... But.. nothing. The thing he is most known for with the broader public was mentioned exactly once by his beard, and that was it.

I know, Ridiculous, One might even say a perverse decision.

How exciting would it have been if the film had shown us even a minute or so of the opening night performance of WEST SIDE STORY as experienced by the audience? Maybe they could have recreated the final moments, when the audience sat in silence over the tragic ending for a few seconds after the curtain and then burst into wild applause? I'd say that's quite a dramatic moment to be captured in a film, and apparently it was completely true.

Gee, what a unique and witty takedown, R251.

I am ever so wounded.

(FYI: It's okay to like a movie and express that. It's also okay to disagree. You wanted more a career retrospective; I was more than happy it was a personal story about a complicated marriage.)

[quote]You wanted more a career retrospective; I was more than happy it was a personal story about a complicated marriage.)

But there is a huge gray area between those two extremes. If MAESTRO had used the complicated marriage of Lenny and Felicia as its framing device but had fewer scenes that were ONLY about that and several more scenes about Bernstein's achievements, I think I would have been very happy with that movie.

I think that's a very fair critique, R254.

That might have been effective. For me? The movie as is was incredibly satisfying. I enjoyed the ride for what it was. I went into it ready to roll my eyes, but instead the story hooked me. The first movie of the year (granted I haven't seen a ton this year) that did that from (mostly) beginning to end.

I do have a weakness for any biopics on 20th century artist types. Pollock, La Vie En Rose, etc, I admit this.

Bernstein was ca nasty piece of work; he was over rated too.

R247, Lenny felt liberated in the 70s just like everyone else. That is made clear at the end of the movie.

That's great that you loved it, R255. But I thought the one thing we all agree upon is that MAESTRO is NOT really a biopic.

A biopic would not have begun with Bernstein at age 25.

The several minutes long biographical clip from when he was awarded a Kennedy Center Honor in 1980 is excellent.

The Mahler scene in the church was great. I saw Lenny in the Musikverein live (sitting on the orchestra side), he really head this over the top conducting style and got totally absorbed.

I'm now listening to his CBS NYPD recording of Mahler's Second. I love all of his versions of this symphony. He means more to me as the person who brought us Mahler than the person who created West Side Story. I like WSS fine, but Mahler makes some of the most splendid music I've ever heard. There are entire weeks, sometimes longer, when Mahler is all I listen to, and I've never grown tired of him.

They should have used “Story of my life” one of my favorite Bernstein songs, inexplicably cut from “Wonderful Town”.’ It would have fit the theme of the movie.

R252, Sounds like a terrific scene with which to end the movie!

R261 agree. Mahler is so complex, yet never in a way that makes you weary or tired (Stravinsky can have that effect on me).. Wonderful composer.

I also wonder if Matt Bomer’s part was cut. They included him in the publicity events for the movie. There are a bunch of photos of him with Cooper & Mulligan.

I am so-so on the film, and BC as an actor, but Carey Mulligan was fabulous. I wish she’d finally win the Oscar, but I guess it’s inevitable that’ll go to the lady from FLOWER MOON (and isn’t that more of a supporting role?

[Quote] I guess it’s inevitable that’ll go to the lady from FLOWER MOON (and isn’t that more of a supporting role?

Haven't seen Flower Moon but Lily Gladstone is the female lead in a film nearly 31/2 hours long? She must have a considerable amount of screen time. Lousie Fletcher and Patricia Neal both won best actress with 22 minutes of screen time.

It was just ok. The beginning with all the running around was pretty unbearable. Also, at least on Netflix, the sound was garbled and it was especially hard to understand BC. CM did a fine job but I think Cooper was miscast. He never came across as a real person. I would be fine with Carey Mulligan getting an Oscar nomination but that’s the only category where it excels.

Matt Bomer must have a great agent or his part was cut. He vanishes quickly from the film and isn’t memorable at all. .

[quote]Maybe they could have recreated the final moments, when the audience sat in silence over the tragic ending for a few seconds after the curtain and then burst into wild applause? I'd say that's quite a dramatic moment to be captured in a film, and apparently it was completely true.

Maybe they couldn't get the rights to any of WSS because Spielberg had them.

R269, Spielberg produced the movie.

[quote][R215], "Maestro" was how some addressed Bernstein, though most called him Lenny.

charlie still refers to him as Lenny, and he met him just once and then only briefly!

Let Bradley Cooper’s Maestro Be the Death of the Biopic- by Eileen Jones

In Maestro, Bradley Cooper plays famed conductor Leonard Bernstein but leaves out the complicating — and fascinating — real-life details for a more streamlined, tearjerking product. It’ll doubtlessly do well at the Oscars.

...Star is Born (2018), which was so horribly botched I couldn’t wait for his character to die and get out of Lady Gaga’s way.

[quote]Haven't seen Flower Moon but Lily Gladstone is the female lead in a film nearly 31/2 hours long? She must have a considerable amount of screen time.

I don't think the AMPAS would consider that objection at all a serious one.

Anthony Hopkins won the Best Actor Oscar for "The Silence of the Lambs," and he has only sixteen minutes of screen time in the entire two-hour film.

R272, Such a bitter, pre-determined review.

R274 More like a plea for the end of the formulaic BioPic: Judy, Elvis, Priscilla, King Richard, Tick, Tick . . .Boom! Being the Ricardos, The Eyes of Tammy Faye, The United States vs Billie Holiday, Respect, Joy, Steve Jobs, The Founder, Spencer, Lincoln, Iron Lady, Bohemian Rhapsody, Ray, Capote, I, Tonya, Milk, Mank, Rocketman . . .

Biopics have been around since the early days of filmmaking, many of them successful and award winning.

They’re not going anywhere.

I love the DL, of all places, bitching about the bio pic.

Read any thread on Madonna, Barbra, Beyonce, Gaga, Norma fucking Shearer, Joan Crawford, etc., and we collectively write a bio pic outline in 500 posts or more.

John Cassavetes did it better in that Columbo episode.

Exactly, r276. The reviewer and r275 are modern-cinema-centric, aka, obtuse.

Digression: R278, Mine as well! That episode is permanently in my recorded shows!

[quote] The character called “ Tommy” is clearly meant to be Michael Tilson Thomas since he looks just like him and Thomas was known to be a lover/protege to Bernstein. So why is he given a fake name in the credits?

He's not meant to be Michael Tilson Thomas.

Bernstein's long-standing lover in the 1970s was a music scholar named Tom Cothran. He is given the correct name in the credits.

[quote] Maybe they couldn't get the rights to any of WSS because Spielberg had them.

Spielberg produced Maestro. I'm pretty sure they could have gotten them.

Re the musicians don’t need the conductor… most of the work of a conductor is done when the performance takes place. The conductor has been rehearsing the orchestra- in the case of a substitution as in the film, obviously the conductor can effect a performance on the spot, and in this case Lenny was second in rehearsal.. Anyone who has ever been in an orchestra (or choir) knows that the conductor make a huge difference- and as I said, most of the work has been done in prep for the performance. You can have great musicians and singers- but you also need a great conductor to produce a great performance.

R281, Really?

This thread is so much calmer after blocking that gassy old know-it-all.

Jamie Bernstein confirms her mother’s ultimatum to Lenny @ 23:00.

That video of Jamie speaking looks like Meryl Streep playing Jamie Bernstein.

I watched it last night and thought the movie was good, but not great. However, Bradley played a closet case just a little too well. Seemed he enjoyed the kissing and ass-slapping just a little too much.

Fuck, I hate Jamie.

👆🏼He also seemed to enjoy the conducting scenes “a little too much” so by your remarkable reasoning R287 I’m guessing he must also be world class conductor IRL.

Good Lord, people are flaunting their total ignorance. As if Leonard Bernstein was anything but 100% over the top. It’s such an inconvenience when history doesn’t line up with your preconceptions and sensibilities, isn’t it?

No Candide?

Very tedious, inert screenplay. Cooper overdoes everything. Mulligan is the main focus and interesting aspect of the movie, odd considering it's a movie supposedly about him. She's a far more compelling actor in general.

This handy powerpoint will tell you everything you need to know.

It was very talky to the point of exhausting. Cooper appeared to be in uncharted territory playing a closeted gay man.

"Cooper appeared to be in uncharted territory being a closeted gay man trying to convey being a straight man playing a closeted gay man."

FIFY.

Lenny Bernstein was not a closeted gay man. He was a gay man in a heterosexual marriage very openly having affairs and one offs with men with the full knowledge of everyone around him including family and professional peers. I suppose to a degree he was bisexual.

Posted in another thread...

Jake Gyllenhaal Lost Out on the Rights to a Leonard Bernstein Biopic

Before Bradley Cooper’s ‘Maestro,’ Jake Gyllenhaal had other plans.

The overlapping dialogue didn't work for me. It muddled their exposition in the first scene and blurred their conflict in the Thanksgiving scene. Overall, I felt the dialogue was unfocused. The Lunts would not have approved.

It laughable to even consider he has a chance at the oscar over Cillian Murphy.

Any questions?

[quote]Very tedious, inert screenplay. Cooper overdoes everything. Mulligan is the main focus and interesting aspect of the movie, odd considering it's a movie supposedly about him. She's a far more compelling actor in general.

The title of the movie would certainly lead anyone to expect it to be primarily about Bernstein, but Mulligan receives top billing at the end. So it seems even Cooper was confused about where the main focus of his movie was meant to be.

Bruce Vilanch is having a lively discussion about it over on Facebook.

I liked it ok. They could definitely have focused on the music more. It would have gone over better here with more about West Side Story. Bradley Cooper sounded like he had a cold in a couple of scenes. Did Bernstein sound like that? Carey Mulligan was excellent.

[quote]Bradley Cooper sounded like he had a cold in a couple of scenes.

He absolutely did, as you'll find if you check out some video interviews he did later in his life.

One of the most boring films I've watched all year. Really could not care about any of them.

I liked it well enough that I watched it in full. But will never do so again.

When I came out to Mother in 1976, she asked me if I knew that Leonard Bernstein was "AC/DC." She was trying but the point was that EVERYONE knew.

[quote]Watch any orchestral video. The members of the orchestra do not even look at the conductor during the performance.

Tom "I can do ANYTHING!!" Cruise "conducting" the Mission: Impossible theme doesn't count.

They don't look directly at the conductor, you can see out of the corner of you eye. You've obviously never played in a band or orchestra. Even high school band students know this.

This again, R309?

Did you just awaken from a coma, sweetie?

Former DL fave Megan "My father" McCain said she "could hardly get through it!"

R311, I felt the same way about “Nyad”.

I liked it for the most part however I get why it didn’t work for everyone. Really liked the direction and Carey Mulligan.

It has no Oscar or Golden Globe win chances. It's just a bookmark for this awards season...

The members of the Academy will want to reward Bradley Cooper in some way for his efforts.

Most likely, score, scenic design and Carey Mulligan.

The one word I would use to describe the film is chaotic.

Mulligan is terrific and Cooper is too much of the time but as a director he's so focused on this constant, driving momentum in the narrative that you don't always know where you are in the timeline. So much about Felicia's accomplishments have to be taken on faith.

All these supporting characters pop in and out and its not clear who they are. If you've read bios of Bernstein, you can figure it out eventually, but if you're not that knowledgeable about the man or his wife, I would think you'd find the film bewildering at times and see her as the stereotypical wife of a famous man chafing in his shadow.

Cooper would have done better to pick a specific period of time in Bernstein's life and marriage and focused on that vs. the college freshman survey course approach which has been overused and is never really satisfying.

Also, there's no way Bernstein and Oppenheim would have been so physical (caressing, etc. ) in public on Central Park West in the 1950s.

Interesting note about Oppenheim: he ran Columbia Masterworks in the 50s and was Dean of the Tisch School of the Arts for 22 years.

r169 they were HEAVILY involved in the making of the film

My mother and I watched it together--she was frustrated at the lack of chyrons/timestamps throughout the film. I found myself confused as to where we were in time and space.

I also hope that the "letterboxed" aspect ratio isn't making a resurgence. Saltburn and Maestro both did it, without any apparent purpose.

Before there was Panavison, CinemaScope, Vista Vision aka widescreen movies were shot in 1:33 aspect ratio which is a box shape. The greatest movies, "Singin' In The Rain", "Gone With The Wind" were all 1:33. Movie screens were box shaped and when the movies were broadcast on TV, they looked fine. For some reason Cooper shot this movie in 1:33, but the problem is movie screens and TV's are now widescreen. My friend watched it on his 85" TV and half the screen was black because the image was boxed in the middle with giant black bars on each side. Said it was a huge distraction.

[quote]I also hope that the "letterboxed" aspect ratio isn't making a resurgence. Saltburn and Maestro both did it, without any apparent purpose.

As per R320's post "letterbox" is not the correct word for the aspect ratio in which Bradley Cooper shot MAESTRO! A better word for it would be "pointless."

For those who stayed to watch the “credits” for all the people who participated in making the film, the entire lush, gorgeous “Candide Overture” was played.

R322 did that make up for the sheer banality of the preceding 2 hours?

Agreed, OP. I saw it last night and thought Mulligan out-acted him completely.

Watching this reminded me of watching Streisand's "The Mirror Has..." No matter what they claim this is about, it's only about the narcissism of the star director. Mulligan is this year's Jeff Bridges.

OK just watched and I say Carrie Mulligan for the win.

but Gladstone will win, and it's one of the few if not only Oscar Scorsese's film will win.

Only one, r327. "Oppenheimer" Oscars = BP, BD, BActor, BSActor, Cinematography.

Well, it could be worse R328

I’ve taken further umbrage at BC after trying to listen to the soundtrack. Shut UP, Bradley.

It's a tragedy Carrie Mulligan doesn't have a chance. The last twenty minutes was amazing.

[quote]All these supporting characters pop in and out and its not clear who they are. If you've read bios of Bernstein, you can figure it out eventually, but if you're not that knowledgeable about the man or his wife, I would think you'd find the film bewildering at times and see her as the stereotypical wife of a famous man chafing in his shadow.

100%. I went in knowing nothing about Bernstein and came out feeling I hadn't learned much more. No clue who most of the supporting characters were or why they were important to the story. And for a movie called Maestro, Bernstein's passion for music felt like an afterthought. The conducting scene, which I assume is supposed to be the climax of the film, didn't really resonate because his music career was always in the background to his horndogging.

[quote]My mother and I watched it together--she was frustrated at the lack of chyrons/timestamps throughout the film. I found myself confused as to where we were in time and space.

Also 100%. The way it was edited it seemed as if significant passages of time were happening but then the kids stayed the same age and the wardrobe and hairstyles didn't change much. Coopers old age makeup was fantastic but it seemed there was no attempt to age Mulligan. I get Montealegre died fairly young but she looked the same age throughout. And while I thought she was the best part of the movie I also noticed Mulligan's accent slipping at certain points.

[quote]The conducting scene, which I assume is supposed to be the climax of the film, didn't really resonate because his music career was always in the background to his horndogging.

Well, in the background to his horndogging but even more so to his marriage.

This an excellent point. I imagine maybe Cooper thought that if he included a six-minute scene of himself as Lenny conducting a Mahler symphony, that would compensate for the lack of focus on his artistic life throughout the rest of the movie. But because there was SO little attention paid to his music making until that point, it had little emotional effect when it did finally arrive.

[quote]And while I thought she was the best part of the movie I also noticed Mulligan's accent slipping at certain points.

Not sure what you mean by that. I'm not all that familiar with Mulligan's other work, but I thought she used her own accent throughout MAESTRO. And since it was her own accent, I don't know why it would have slipped at certain points, and I did not notice that.

A "six-minute scene" Bradley has said he spent SIX YEARS learning! I mean, WTH?!

[quote]A "six-minute scene" Bradley has said he spent SIX YEARS learning! I mean, WTH?!

Of course, he wants to be sure everyone knows how VERY, VERY HARD it is to do what he did. And it IS difficult, but he is SUCH a drama queen!

It's not like he spent all 6 years just working on how to conduct. He was making other films during that time.

R335, Daniel Day-Lewis is the king of letting people know just how hard he worked preparing for a role. The most shameless kind of Oscar baiting but somehow he was never called out for it.

[quote]It's not like he spent all 6 years just working on how to conduct. He was making other films during that time.

I realize that, but the way he talks about it, he makes it sound like he DID spend a great amount of time during those six years learning how to conduct that six-minute piece.

Did this guy blow everyone from here to Timbuktu? He can't act or direct or do anything.

[quote]Daniel Day-Lewis is the king of letting people know just how hard he worked preparing for a role. The most shameless kind of Oscar baiting but somehow he was never called out for it.

He can still eat with his left foot!

R339, And masturbate with his right.

BC's teacher for conducting was Yannick. Yum. They did a good interview recently on Fresh Air.

R341, Not Yanni?

Yannick's a hottie but he's been married to his husband for quite a while. The current bleached hair isn't to my personal taste, tho.

[quote]Did this guy blow everyone from here to Timbuktu? He can't act or direct or do anything.

And yet he keeps doing it and well, you're not.

Seven(7) Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Original Screenplay is admirable.

I watched it tonite. Carey Mulligan is outstanding, as always. Big surprise for me was Sara Silverman. Great job. The movie itself was ok.

Sarah Silverman shouldn't have been in this movie. The cunt whined about me being cast as Joan Rivers for a miniseries and said it was Jewface. Yet, it was fine and dandy for her to be in this movie with Cooper using a prosthetic nose to play Bernstein.

OP do you have any opinions that aren't personal?

I hope Stone and Gladstone cancel each other out and Benning or Mulligan wins.

R349. If there's going to be an upset in any category it's this one.

Why didn't they just hire someone who looked like Bernstein- instead of hours of prosthetic applications?

[quote]Why didn't they just hire someone who looked like Bernstein- instead of hours of prosthetic applications?

Because the Writer/Producer/Director wanted Bradley Cooper for the role, that's why.

He's in love.

He's in love until awards season is over.