It’s the second film from Richardson after his debut the year prior look back in anger (1959), part of the sort of british new wave but better known as like the angry British films from this era from him and Lindsay Anderson
Full of cruel life and realism
Olivier is absolutely brilliant here- he’s usually so regal in his performances but he’s a complete scoundrel or as someone mentions “a bit of a bastard”- shows Olivier’s range
Early performances from Finney and Alan Bates and Livesey from colonel blimp is quite good as well
Really haunting rendition of “why should I care?” song – a depressing film
Olivier’s soliloquy about being “dead behind the eyes” is probably enough alone to put it in the back half of a normal year’s top 10
There’s a wierd little film fetish I wanna share here. There are the 2 ways I love a film,
1. I love it so much that I want more and more people to watch it. I recommend it to everyone, I write & discuss about it. The grand Budapest hotel is one such film. Bergman films. Every Kieslowski film especially the double life of Veronique.
2. And then there are few films I love them so much that i want no one to watch them. I want them to be my little secrets.
Absurdly I feel this about every Billy Wilder film. But The Entertainer by Tony Richardson is on the top of that list. I love it that much. It’s a gem.
@Drake
A hypothetical question
What if this film was made in 2010 by Richardson? Everything stays the same but the release year is 2010? Would it still hold up? Have the same reputation/ grade?
@M*A*S*H- Tough question. What do you think? I think context is important (knowing the year, what came first, what came after)- but I also do not believe films from the past (or future) need to be graded on some curve.
@Drake- that’s the point I’m not a fan of the “relevant to the time” Theory.
Yes breathless revolutionized cinema but it’s not a top 100 MP because of that. It’s a top 100 MP in any year of cinema.
According to me there’s no such thing as dated in 2010 but a masterpiece in 1960.
@M*A*S*H- Yes- the “hasn’t aged well” criticism is right up there with someone saying a movie is “boring”- doesn’t tell me anything about the film quality itself- but plenty about critic saying it.
[…] The Entertainer – Richardson […]
There’s a wierd little film fetish I wanna share here. There are the 2 ways I love a film,
1. I love it so much that I want more and more people to watch it. I recommend it to everyone, I write & discuss about it. The grand Budapest hotel is one such film. Bergman films. Every Kieslowski film especially the double life of Veronique.
2. And then there are few films I love them so much that i want no one to watch them. I want them to be my little secrets.
Absurdly I feel this about every Billy Wilder film. But The Entertainer by Tony Richardson is on the top of that list. I love it that much. It’s a gem.
@Drake
A hypothetical question
What if this film was made in 2010 by Richardson? Everything stays the same but the release year is 2010? Would it still hold up? Have the same reputation/ grade?
@M*A*S*H- Tough question. What do you think? I think context is important (knowing the year, what came first, what came after)- but I also do not believe films from the past (or future) need to be graded on some curve.
@Drake- that’s the point I’m not a fan of the “relevant to the time” Theory.
Yes breathless revolutionized cinema but it’s not a top 100 MP because of that. It’s a top 100 MP in any year of cinema.
According to me there’s no such thing as dated in 2010 but a masterpiece in 1960.
@M*A*S*H- Yes- the “hasn’t aged well” criticism is right up there with someone saying a movie is “boring”- doesn’t tell me anything about the film quality itself- but plenty about critic saying it.