rogerG

I watched every episode and some of them twice. Will & Grace can make me smile sometimes, but Vicious makes me laugh out loud. The cast is fabulous. Frances de La Tour is pure comic genius. All of them are wonderful and funny. Love the writing.

In an off year, Michael Stuhlbarg might have stood a chance. There's too much competition this year, and Stuhlbarg's moment in the film, while devastatingly brilliant, lasted only a few minutes. IMO, Armie Hammer's performance in the movie was never Oscar worthy. Oliver is not the Oscar-winning character. I suspect Armie knew/knows this. He's not shy about throwing a ton of credit Chalamet's way. I suspect Hammer also knows how the choice to be in the film will aid his career and the parts offered to him in the future. So great that the film got an Oscar nod. Very important.

My obsession continues: Timothée Chalamet at the ever so young age of 17 promoting YoungArts, and probably not realizing he's sharing the wisdom of an 80-year-old successful man. Truly insightful.

It's nice to see the old gang back, and occasionally the script and the performances coerce a smile. But I gotta say, it's mostly a comedy dud for me.

I, too, am looking forward to that. I saw Luca's commentary version of I Am Love twice. I have to assume he did one for CMBYN. I sure hope so. He's a really smart guy, and I love listening to him talk about his process, especially how he had to remove Armie's balls from several frames. I suspect one of the frames was when Elio grabs Oliver's junk shortly after their first kiss. "Am I offending you?" LOVE that moment! You can see it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94SwfOmHRQ4

There's some guy on YouTube hawking instructions on how to get the movie from a torrent site. Have no idea about the quality. There are some countries that will not allow the film to be shown, and there seem to be plenty of people from those places who appreciate the torrent download. Of course, if you want movies like this produced moving forward, it's best to support the effort with ticket sales. There's nothing like money to convince Hollywood that the subject matter has a formidable following.

Armie Hammer talking to Peter Travers on the making of ‘Call Me by Your Name’

If someone wants to talk about Woody Allen, can you start a new thread, please? CMBYN is too valuable a subject to be shared with anyone else.

@tchm In my obsession, I happened to see a video of Timothée Chalamet visiting with Selena Gomez in her home. It was some kind of Social Media live feed, whatever that means. In the video, Selena strongly praised Timothée's work in the film, and she told all her fans the film was a must-see. I assume her very public endorsement is having an effect. My third audience felt like a social media event. I've never seen so many young people (like 15-years young) at an indie-type film before, and I've never seen so many smartphones in an audience before. Luckily, most everyone was respectful with their phones remaining off during the movie. I'm sure I'll see the film again, but I'm going to wait for Netflix or DVD. It seems the true beauty of this film will stand a better chance of shining through on a really good HD TV. I don't think viewers are getting the best visual experience by seeing this film in a theater. The colors seem very flat to me, and like I said, some movie projectors are making the film project too dark.

To be perfectly honest, the best viewing experience might well be your home TV. For some reason, the clips that are available on the internet are much lighter/brighter than what you see in the movie theater, at least for me. I've seen the film in three different theaters, and each version has been its own unique viewing experience. The third viewing this past weekend was the darkest. So many scenes were too dark to see much detail. Very annoying. Projectors vary from screen to screen. Many scenes in the film take place at night or in low-light situations, so you'll want a good projected version to catch all the details. I have a feeling Netflix or Blu-Ray will produce the best viewing pleasure.

Went to see this film again for the 3rd time over the weekend. I'm a bit obsessed. The theater was packed. Sold out. Tons of younger folk. It almost felt like a Millenial's viewing. The experience of seeing on film such raw emotion between two male characters who love each other captivates me. I think I'm in love with the love that is presented in this movie. I can't wait to own my own copy.

Wow. Such an exquisite example of crash and burn. Who knew it could be so difficult to annex the popularity and mystique of the former Rentboy, all in the name of "making it better?"

Christiane Amanpour had her way with the boys last night. Timothée Chalamet made his second appearance with Jimmy Fallon the other night as well.

If you introduce the fantasy of sex into a massage experience you enjoy, you risk losing the massage therapist forever. It's happened to me, and I did not enjoy the loss.

Ian's body sure is lean and ripped. Sure would like to know if he has talent in his hands. If anyone goes, please report back.

Since there's so much white trash at these events anyway, she seemed to fit right in.

I'd be very interested in traveling with guys who love to travel, and love art, history, and good food. I like the idea of the escort having his own hotel room. I'm not the constant-companion type. I certainly don't require sex 24/7. The kind of trips I imagine are expensive. The Powerball money would help pay for that.

Armie Hammer spoke to Kyle Buchanan for NY Magazine shortly before the film was released in NYC. Of his failed movies, he says, “That might be the Armie Hammer effect.” http://www.vulture.com/2017/11/armie-hammer-call-me-by-your-name.html Perhaps on this board, but there is plenty of criticism, and I think some of it is valid. It's not a perfect film. I agree with @JBrian72, some of the editing was sloppy. The director says the original budget with James Ivory directing was 12 million. When that package could not get financing, Ivory dropped out and Luca shot the film for 3.5 million. Corners have to be cut when that much money has to be severed from a budget. Money can buy you time to perfect, and it seems there just wasn't enough of either.

I don't believe Armie is to blame. He's also tall and blonde with low hangers. Some guys do seem to have all the luck. Would have loved to have had an ear on the conversations Hammer had with the director. My view is much less cynical. While crucial, I don't think Armie's performance as Oliver is Oscar worthy. The acting awards belong to Timothée Chalamet. Armie's taking the role of Oliver is/was very brave. And he made it work with great results. He says playing this character had a profound effect on his craft. I'm looking forward to seeing his work in the future.

@JBrian72 Interesting thoughts. Perhaps you should see it again, after you see some interviews with the director on YouTube. I did not know much about this film before I saw it. Almost nothing. I can see how hype could possibly negate the film's impact. IMO, the film is somewhat discreet. Most film goers complain if a movie is over 2 hours, no matter what the film's subject. This info is in well-known stats. Many people complained about "slow" when they criticized Brokeback Mountain. It's not easy to cram or convey a coming of age love story, a story that takes place over six weeks one summer, into 2 hours. In the book, it took Elio some time to face the truth about his feelings for Oliver. I loved the director's slow build up to this, and I would have been perfectly fine to have every detail last longer. To each his own. I saw the NY Times' director-cut of the WWI scene before I had seen the film, and I thought, "This is it?" Then when I finally saw the film, I got it. It's a very special moment, the director explains his motives, and I love that scene more and more. Armie Hammer is a bonafide straight-male movie star with a team of high-powered Hollywood people handling his career. Imagine what it must be like to convince him and all the members of his team, not to mention his family, to perform explicit love scenes, however you wish to define explicit, with another man on movie screens around the world. At some point, one has to praise the director for every single detail he was able to capture, not to mention casting Armie in the first place and convincing him to do it, no matter how many gay men will complain it wasn't enough. In interviews, the director is quite clear about the sensual role the scenery plays in the film. Swaying erect trees dropping juicy peaches. He expressed little interest in filming actual sex scenes. It was believed the peach scene would never make the cut. But then they shot it, and the director was happy. The scene directly after the peach scene (when Oliver joins sleeping Elio in the attic bed) is one of my favorites. I can't imagine this film without these two scenes. I had Jewish gay friends in the 1980's who came from academic families. Some dad's were that enlightened. It was not the norm, and nor is it the norm now. Most of the father's dialogue was pulled from the book. Most of the action in the film is also pulled from the book. Maybe you wished they made a different movie? I suggest you see it again and look a little deeper.

I totally disagree with that. Jonathan Groff was not the problem with this show, especially not his age. If anything, he is the reason to watch it. There are problems with the character, Patrick, for sure. Lauren Weedman played the "Grace" in almost every gay man's life, and she did a fine job, considering the material and this ensemble. IMO, Agustin was the worst character. An annoying, selfish downer, whose presence in this group made no sense. There was no on-screen chemistry between between Patrick (Groff) and Richie (Castillo), a match that fed the plot but nothing more. Patrick had much more chemistry with his boss Kevin (Tovey), but that relationship was just another gay man's fantasy. Dom (Bartlett) and Patrick's friendship had the most potential for being real. Dom and Lynn (Bartlett and Bakula) also provided an interesting sub plot.

I watched every minute, but did not love the characters and the writing. It all seemed too contrived to me.

Love the "Mystery of Love" video. The museum shots are interesting. Would love to know their backstory. If they were shot for the film, they did not make the cut. For those who haven't seen the movie yet, it's a good idea to familiarize yourself with Sufjan Stevens' lyrics to the songs used. The music has a greater impact if you know the lyrics. Also, I saw the film in two different theaters. The second theater's sound system was not as good as the first, and certain key words in the script were inaudible. I was not happy about that. Sometimes, the dialogue is a bit too discreet in this film. I wasn't expecting a theater's sound system to be that important. I won't make that mistake when I see it again. This may have been posted already:

There were a couple of these self-doubt moments that were really glaring from the viewer perspective. Cohen got a bit defensive-snippy when Anderson seemed to be critical. Again, if this is chemistry, the lab bombed. That's the main reason I've always given Anderson a bit of rope. But I know people who work with him, and they don't have great things to say. He really doesn't like to be touched.

Definitely no need to argue about that. "Call me by your name and I'll call you by mine" is a wonderful, brilliant, especially poetic way to say I love you. When Elio says it on the final phone call with Oliver, it's effect is devastating. I'm tearing up as I write this.