How did Kenneth Branagh go from being young to being old...
... entirely skipping middle age in between?\
I''m watching "Wallender" and he''s playing the father of a woman in her late 20s. It''s very strange. He didn''t play men in their 40s in between playing men in their early 30s and men in their late 50s.
He married a non-celebrity after dumping Emma Thompson for Helena Bonham Carter (and being dumped in return for Tim Burton). He needed to be with someone less famous than he is.\
He had HUGE ego problems for years and years. He seems to have settled into being just middle-famous after trying for decades to be the next Orson Welles or Laurence Olivier.
If I were Swedish, I''d be very offended at the way the British have filmed Wallender. They made Sweden look like an Iron Curtain country, all gray and black and dismal. Look at the clothing - everyone wears gray or black and the cameras seem to have a gray filter over them.
I feel kind of sorry for Branagh.\
He should have won an Oscar instead of Emma.
Don''t forget he gave us that Frankenstein film with De Niro, R3. Feel sorry for those who saw it.
r3, are you kidding? Thompson''s win for "Howards End" is one of the most deserved wins of all time.
[quote]If I were Swedish, I''d be very offended at the way the British have filmed Wallender.\
Are you watching the same programme? The British version is over bright, filmed in the summer and has endless shots of red houses, yellow fields and blue sea. The, far superior, Swedish version, is grey, dark, filmed in winter and full of rain and snow.
Glug glug and being forever caught between emulating Orson Welles and Laurence Olivier without the talented mania of the former or the nose putty of the latter.\
Nothing he has done is balanced, paced or measured. It is pushy pastiche with one eye on an interior design magazine and the other on a generously-lit mirror.
Compare the first Brannagh Wallander - Sidetracked - with one of the Swedish episodes, such as Tackmanteln and you''ll immediately see the difference. \
The BBC version is bright, glossy, focused on a very specific type of Swedish architecture and ;landscape - even the later episodes feature bright, white castles, endless flat fields and blue filtered sea.\
The Swedish version is a much more realistic depiction of normal Swedish landscape and architecture. There''s peeling paint, slums, main roads, dilapidated (rather than designer chic) farms and people in sensible winter clothing.\
They are miles apart. The Brannagh versions might as well be about anywhere given how little they reflect Sweden.
The stills from the BBC version really don''t reflect the whole episodes - and quite honestly the ones you''ve posted look as if they were downloaded from a a poor dvd copy on a 4 inch screen. Even then they are far warmer, and consciously designer, in tone than the Swedish version
Could someone please post more stills comparing the different national versions of "Wallender"? It''s so endlessly thrilling and interesting...
R16, you made me LOL. I WW''d you.
I''ve watched a lot of the Swedish Wallander shows over the years (MHZ has stations around the U.S. that show International Mystery), and I just saw the Kenneth version tonight. It was dreary, but didn''t capture the true moroseness of the Swedish version. And it was all about Kenneth.
we do that
This show is way too melodramatic. Branagh is a shameless ham.
His lack of lips always made him look like his dentures fell out and it''s just gotten more pronounced as he''s aged. Thus, young turk to old man.
R4, he did give us DeNiro full frontal.\
It looks like Mr. Microphone
R17, you''re the reason Wit & Wisdom is as lame as it is. Please, I beg you, wait for something truly witty and wise.
Bertolucci gave us DeNiro full frontal too in "1900", plus a scene where an actress attempts to masturbate both him and Gerard Depardieu (before he got so fat) simulataneously. It''s also not simulated.%0D\
Branagh was very full of himself early on, especially after "Henry V" and "Much Ado About Nothing" scored. And "Much Ado" was overrated.%0D\
I will say that his film of "Hamlet" was much better than I thought it would be, despite the jarringly bad appearances by Jack Lemmon and Robin Williams. Having Kate Winslet, Julie Christie, and the great Derek Jacobi on board in the other major roles certainly helped.%0D\
But that film hardly played anywhere, and then there was that godawful film of "Love''s Labours Lost" with Alicia Silverstone and musical numbers. That pretty much sunk him.
Perhaps you should read the books. They are very gray.
Because in early middle age, he was sufficiently boyish to still be convincing in youngish roles, like Hamles.
"Bertolucci gave us DeNiro full frontal too in "1900", plus a scene where an actress attempts to masturbate both him and Gerard Depardieu (before he got so fat) simulataneously. It''s also not simulated."%0D\
I recently saw 1900 and was struck with how that scene would most like not be done with stars today. Also struck by the use of nudity of the children, which would certainly not be done today.%0D\
I love the Wallander series. It is very dark though and it took me awhile to realize it was shot in Sweden. Great series though about how real people are detectives and the shit they see and have to do leaves them wounded and shell shocked.
Link, please, R22.
Yes, I googled.
I''m quite surprised by your comment R28. Having seen the Swedish versions I''m more inclined to think of the BBC version as light, fairly insubstantial and unrealistic. It would have been as easy to set and film it in the UK, saving us a ton of licence fer, for all it reflects Sweden or the tone of the original stories:But, I think it must be horses for courses. On the Wallander discussion lists people either like one version or the other. No one I know likes both.
Well, r30, I like that there is a shot of American bravado detective in the BBC version. Someone wrote the BBC Wallander is Law and Order written through the eyes of Bergman. Sounds about right. The BBC Wallander wipes his arm pits on the curtains, washes his pills down with a glass of wine, orders pizza(in Sweden for god''s sake), cries when he discovers the body of a young girl but ALWAYS solves the murder. Hamlet with a six gun strapped to his leg.\
Booze & too much sex
Branagh''s voice gets extremely high pitched when he gets excitable/angry in films. I find it grating.
I enjoyed the BBC version of Wallander, but I have not read the books, nor have I seen the Swedish version. I will probably do both.\
Coming off several weeks of Mystery''s ghastly Inspector Lewis series (as if Whately could fill Morse''s shoes), Wallander was a treat.\
Maybe it''s all about context.
Am I the only person who has difficulty hearing these Britmysts? The audio quality is so bad I often miss what people are saying (as opposed to missing what people are saying on 30 Rock because they talk fast). I have no problem with audio on Australian, Canadian and US shows.%0D\
And another thing... an actor goes,"Mmmmphhalogic scawigafull proopermmph," but I can hear the birds chirping clearly in the background.%0D\
Speak up, dammit.
Eh? Wuddja Say, Sonny Boy?
I think he looks hot for an older gent.
He's got the same mouth as Paul Ryan, like he didn't put his dentures in yet.
R4 after watching that film, I vowed never to see another of his directorial films again. That's how much i disliked it. Years later I watch another film and there was this nagging feeling. There was something about it that i instantly hated. It was just so bad. Anyways, I fast forward to the credits...surprise, surprise dir. By Branagh. Ugh.
Well, we just started watching Wallander on Netflix. I don't know what it is about Branaugh but I love him as a actor. I know, I've seen him hammy sometimes, but he's quite restrained in Wallender.
He's in his 50s, pasty-white and I'd do him in a minute. So fucking hot.
I think he's pretty hot in Wallander.
I've always wondered if there is more than one version of Wallander and whether or not Kenneth Branagh is involved.
There are two Swedish versions of Wallander. Can someone post some stills, so we can compare the degrees of dreariness?!!
Here's Rolf Lassgard, the second of two Swedish Wallanders.
I like both versions, they're different but brilliant. I saw the British version first and, at first, was disappointed with the Swedish version but once I watched a few episodes I stopped comparing and enjoyed it. Just keep an open mind.
The British version is available on Netflix streaming. You can watch the Swedish version on Amazon's streaming service.
The exterior shots on the UK series are very bright, but the interior shots are very dark and dreary. I just assumed this is to juxtapose the outer world -- the face everyone puts on in order to fit into society -- with the inner world where murder, turmoil, depression, family problems, etc, occur.
Sorry, but I find Branagh's Henry V and Hamlet INFINITELY superior to Olivier's, and as good as Welle's Shakespeare.
Ego or no, he's very talented, and anyone who claims there's something "unbalanced" about either of those two films is an illiterate moron.
[quote]Sorry, but I find Branagh's Henry V and Hamlet INFINITELY superior to Olivier's, and as good as Welle's Shakespeare.
Better, to my mind. His production of the ultimate Hamlet was brilliant, except for the rather goofy ghost scenes. And Jack Lemmon as Marcellus.
It's almost silly to compare the two HENRY Vs, as they are so different in concept. Olivier's film was by far the most successful adaptation of Shakespeare on screen to that point. The framing device of starting and ending the film in the Globe Theater works beautifully, and has been copied by others. It also was devised as a rallying cry for Britain during the latter part of WWII.
Branagh's version is more equivocal about war which was the revisionist fashion in British stage versions of the play at the time. Branagh in fact played Henry in an RSC production of this type (which I saw), and he borrowed heavily from it devising his film version.
The two films also show the changes in acting styles over the decades.
I like Branagh's version very much, but still get a kick out of watching Olivier's, especially as he's a much wittier actor than Branagh.
Welles' films of Shakespeare are a very uneven bunch. Only CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT (aka FALSTAFF) has enough brilliance in it to carry you through. OTHELLO and MACBETH are so truncated, they are like Cliff Notes versions with some brilliant sequences.
Branagh's HAMLET has some awful acting in cameos (Jack Lemmon, Robin Williams, Gerard Depardieu), but he and the rest of the cast are solid. It's no mean feat to make a 4-hour film and keep you interested.
Olivier's HAMLET has many large cuts in the text and is probably overrated. I haven't seen it in years.
To get back to the OP's question, Irish men rarely age well.
I'm in a Wallandaze with so many versions.
The Wallander author, Henning Mankell, wanted Krister Henriksson to play Wallander and kept asking him. Henriksson always said no until he finally read the books and quickly changed his mind. When he felt Wallander had taken over his life for too long and he wanted to go back to the theater, he asked Mankell to write him an exit story, and Mankell wrote Wallander with Alzheimer's.
Eventually they decided to resurrect Wallander, and they brought in Rolf Lassgard, my least favorite. It's not that he was so terrible, but he was sandwiched between two better versions.
I've read it was Branagh's idea to bring back Wallander in what is obviously the most expensive production. It is beautifully photographed and filled with ponderous drama but somehow lacks the heart of the original version and the books.