John and Kelly React! Onwards, Bond Rumors and Wish List, and SAG Awards!

In this edition of John and Kelly React!, we talk Pixar’s next work starring Chris Pratt, discuss Bond rumors, make a list of people we want to see in the next Bond movie, and dissect those SAG nominations!

React 12.29.2018 001

Kelly: We’ve got some Avengers collaboration with Tom Holland and Chris Pratt in an animated tale called Onwards. I expect this is Pratt’s filler work as Disney scrambles to get Guardians squared away post-James Gunn.

John: Ah. So. Hot take: I feel like Chris Pratt is a better voice actor than on screen actor.

Kelly: I agree with that. He’s got great tone and inflection. Facial expression is a hit or miss if it’s not lovable confused jock. What’s the story about?

John: Holland and Pratt play brothers in a suburban fantasy film. So far that’s all we got in terms of story. If anything, I like the idea of the two playing brothers.

Kelly: Apparently, it has to do with two brothers traveling to visit their father just before he dies and it turns into a magical journey. It sounds a little bit like Maniac or a whimsical fantasy drama a la Eternal Sunshine. It’s got lots of potential in its premise.

John: A Pixar film centered around the death of a family member? Better get the tissues now.

Kelly: Like Up but the person they are traveling on behalf of is alive.

John: An animated family film that involves a journey of some sort is usually par for the course, but Pixar always finds a way to entangle a deeper and sometimes more adult message in there.

Kelly: This one sounds much more adult than a typical Pixar film though. Dealing with loss in aftermath and in the moment are two very different things. Then again, the characters might actually be magical and living in a fantasy world rather than just using the fantasy world as a metaphor… So maybe I’m wrong on all accounts.

John: I really hope it’s human characters. Pixar in particular has great people designs. I’m biased, but the people in Coco were really appealing from a design standpoint. Still cartoony in features but grounded in reality.

Kelly: Now, this is coming from Dan Scanlon, the same director as Monster’s University. Aesthetically, I don’t know what to expect with the character design. I’m kind of already assuming Inside Out-like characters. The emotions, not the humans. Is that weird?

John: No, it makes sense, the synopsis is a bit vague. Also, I’m in the minority but I loved Monster’s University.

Kelly: He’s also worked on Cars, Brave, and Inside Out in random jobs

John: He’s still sort of new, not a big talent like Pete Doctor or Brad Bird. Monster’s University was really panned critically but I liked what is saw. Based on that and the voice cast I’m a little hyped. Plus it’s Pixar and their track record is still pretty solid… Not including Cars of course.

Kelly: I’ve never seen any of the Cars. I heard 2 was not good.

John: If anything they pay the bills so Pixar can keep doing stuff like Up and Inside Out.

Kelly: And hire talent like Pratt and Holland. Which by the way- someone’s doing an accent. I don’t know who but someone is giving us one.

John: I don’t trust Pratt with accents that aren’t American.

Kelly: He’s got a pretty good British one, for an early 20s woman from Essex.

John: Ah. Yes, I remember. I stand corrected

Kelly: Good old Graham!

React 12.29.2018 003

Kelly: In other casting news… How do you feel about Rami Malek taking on a villain role? Apparently, they are eying him for James Bond.

John: As a Bond novice, (I have only seen Skyfall) I can only say that I like me some Malek. I’m still meh on his take on Mercury, but I like that he’s being eyed for these big roles. I am very proud of my boyhood crush. He played a Pharoah in Night at the Museum and I have been smitten ever since.

Kelly: I don’t know if he has the chops to play a villain, or at least the kind of villain I’d want to see from this kind of movie and under Fukunaga’s direction. I’m hoping for less hammy and more broody. More of a felt presence, so to speak. Have you watched any of Mr. Robot?

John: I have, He’s very good in it. I think he’s got the chops. I do think it’s a bit of an obvious choice, but the Bond movies always get obvious villain types of actors.

Kelly: Is he though? I didn’t see his name anywhere else in the lead up. I thought they might have went with an older pick. I was kind of hoping Chiwetel Ejiofer would get tabbed. He’s got a good voice for it. Well, it’s not set in stone. I’ll hold out for Chiwetel.

John: I can see it maybe as a youth vs experience sort of take if Craig is still attached.

Kelly: It would also be cool to see McConaughey and Fukunaga together again but it can’t be like The Dark Tower McConaughey. I refuse. I know you said you are a novice but Lea Seydoux is rumored to be the Bond Woman again. I’m disappointed. She was one of the lest interesting Bond Girls in memory.

John: I heard she was bad. And so was the actual flick, which is a shame cause I wanted to see it.

Kelly: It was not very good. The Daniel Craig bonds are a roller coaster of a series. Casino Royale is top 3 Bond Movies of all time. Skyfall was meh, but I know a lot of people consider it Top 5. And Spectre had a lot of potential to be interesting and then it just wasn’t.

John: Good to know, I will definitely check out Casino Royale.

Kelly: Particularly for the Bond Women, Spectre made a really big deal about Monica Bellucci and then the movie went straight to Lea Seydoux, who is significantly younger than Craig and the story was a little odd. Like she was the daughter of one of his associates and she’s supposed to be very smart and cold, but then falls for Bond and her heart gets shattered when she realizes he’s been lying to her and spoiler alert- he killed her father. It’s a very weak character, in that she went for the, “How can I love you?” angle rather than the “You lied to me!” Well, I don’t remember if it was a weak character or poorly acted. It’s been a while.

John: Here’s a fun question.

Kelly: Shoot.

John: Top 3 actors you want to see as a Bond villain.

John: Kate Winslet sprang to mind. I don’t think I’ve ever seen her playing a villain.

Kelly: I want someone legit to play a Bond villain, which is why I had Chiwetel down. He’s my top pick if ever I had one. And maybe even Gillian Anderson. She’s excellent in The Fall, playing a very pragmatic mind, and there was a small push for her to be the first female Bond. But those two being said, I also want someone physically capable, so I’ve got to go with my main manz- Idris Elba. He’s getting a little too old to play Bond himself, so I have to go for the next best thing.

John: Excellent point.

Kelly: Bond Women, I want Rosamund Pike back because she’s too good to be remembered for Die Another Day. They did her wrong. Both her and Toby Stephens.

John: The only thing that’ll pull me into these movies is who’s in it, nothing against Bond or spy stuff but it’s not really my bag.

Kelly: I recommend watching Golden Eye simply for its 90s value as well as Casino Royale. They’re both directed by Martin Campbell and for some reason, he just has a knack for doing action movies with slower spots in them. Also Sean Bean. Also, Mads Mikkelsen. Also, Famke Janssen’s legs. Golden Eye is also weirdly timeless. Like it’s a 90’s movie but aside from some of the technology bit, mentions of the Cold War, and the women’s hair, it can be placed in a few different decades. I’d like to have a fresh set of eyes verify that for me, so do confirm.

John: Will do, I could go for some aged 90s cheese. As for Malek, I for one welcome him in anything. Especially high-profile stuff like the Bond series.

Kelly: We shall see. I have reservations but I’ll wait for the official announcement to really care.

React 12.29.2018 006

John: Speaking of Malek, guess who got nominated for a SAG???

Kelly: What’s the news?

John: The awards keep coming! We got SAG noms for The Favourite, Green Book, Vice, and my personal favorite, The Blackkklansman.

Kelly: For individual, I see Actor this year being a battle between Cooper and Bale and Actress being whoever gets nominated for The Favourite and Gaga. I am glad to see Emily Blunt on there twice for very different roles.

John: So, full disclosure I haven’t seen the flick yet, but what do you think is the determining factor of who is the Lead Actor? I’ve seen a lot of contention in regard to Green Book about this.

Kelly: Good question and legit. I think here, it’s a very good argument. Mahershala Ali doesn’t have the same amount of screen time but Mortensen has arguably an easier character to play and it is more of Mortensen’s story as well. Mind you, in 2002, Nicole Kidman was all over The Hours with about 20 minutes of screen time and it was not really “her story.” Rather, the character of Virginia Wolfe provided the context. It might just be the pool. I know they don’t want actors to “cancel each other out” by being nominated in the same category for the same movie and Mortensen is a bit more “leading man” than Ali.

John: Fair enough! As for the clear snub, No Michael B. Jordan? I see the ensemble itself was nominated for Black Panther, but not the most talked about role. Disappointing to say the least.

Kelly: I expect that we won’t see him for any acting nominations this season. If the Globes don’t take the opportunity, then there’s no chance.

John: Sad but true.

Kelly: It’s interesting that the cast or ensemble nomination is a lot of mainstream movies. Like the only one that registers as a not so blockbuster pick to me is BlacKKKlansman. Also, I feel like I should see A Star is Born now. I keep hearing really good things about it, particularly for Cooper’s directing.

John: Same, I did have a feeling it would be this year’s award darling. Not sure if this is just hype, but I’m told Gaga is incredible in it.

Kelly: Yeah. My curiosity is at least sparked. I’m still thinking The Favourite will emerge as the award shows get more serious. For Black Panther and Crazy Rich Asians to be nominated is big. Those were two of the most mainstream movies this year, so it’s good that they are acknowledging things that the crowds really loved and had a lot to say about. For those two in particular, they stayed in the theaters for so long because the audiences kept them there.

John: Excellent point, and it doesn’t feel like pandering unlike the so-called “popular film award.”

Kelly: With the exception of Bohemian Rhapsody, it’s a good mix of mainstream movies that were still smart or technical enough on some level.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s