Call Me By Your Name

[+ WilliamM]

He is known to be a good father. How would you know? Now you're just piling on for little reason.

 

Of course, I never said he wasn't a good father. (I've met him, and he was perfectly cordial, but I don't know him.) His "bully" comment was just silly.

 

I have not seen the film yet because I have pneumonia. Maybe tomorrow, or Monday. Kenny is the first person to make even a vaguely critical comment.

[rogerG]

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

Kenny is the first person to make even a vaguely critical comment.

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.

[OCClient]

Judging from your avatar Hammer seems to be everything you would like to be (but aren't?). Sour grapes?

Well put!

My only complaint is his height, how there might not be enough room when he's trying to roll me around on the bed.

[Kenny]

I have not seen the film yet because I have pneumonia. Maybe tomorrow, or Monday. Kenny is the first person to make even a vaguely critical comment.

It's a moving movie.

[jjkrkwood]

It's always interesting to me when a str8 actor can so compellingly and convincingly play "GAY"......

[LivingnLA]

It's always interesting to me when a str8 actor can so compellingly and convincingly play "GAY"......

 

Why? Acting as a profession is precisely that set of skills and abilities that enable a good actor to transform into whatever character they are asked to play. Most actors have defined ranges or limits of how much they can transform and remain believable, but the truly great ones are chameleons. I've dealt with a handful of actors over the years and attended a few classes when I was asked to observe. It's fascinating to see how malleable our outward presentations or personas are in real life. Most people go through life blissfully ignorant of how performative their "role" truly is in life. I believe the hetero/homo cultural dichotomy is largely constructed. There's far more overlap than many people are willing to comfortably admit.

 

More fundamentally, what is "GAY" about his performance? Is it the way he expressed tenderness or affection or the heat in his eyes when they were about to have sex? The erotic tension? All I saw on the screen was two people who were magnetically drawn to each other and how that played out. Actors are trained differently and I don't know who his teachers were, but I'd wager he was using powerful memories from his life (probably his first love) to create his emotive expressions and channel those feelings into his performance. What you saw as "GAY" was probably a witnessing of the first time he fell in love in real life and how it felt for him as expressed through the lenses of the script and character he was asked to create.

 

Also, remember, what we see on screen has been carefully constructed by a director, cinematographer, and editor to name just three of the key players. Again, styles vary, but sometimes many takes of a scene are required before the key players believe they "got it" for that scene. It's only in the editing and post-production work that all of those "got it" scenes are stitched together to create the movie we see. We have no idea if or how many times he may have been told to "give more passion!"

Edited January 8, 2018 by LivingnLA

[jjkrkwood]

Why? Acting as a profession is precisely that set of skills and abilities that enable a good actor to transform into whatever character they are asked to play. Most actors have defined ranges or limits of how much they can transform and remain believable, but the truly great ones are chameleons. I've dealt with a handful of actors over the years and attended a few classes when I was asked to observe. It's fascinating to see how malleable our outward presentations or personas are in real life. Most people go through life blissfully ignorant of how performative their "role" truly is in life. I believe the hetero/homo cultural dichotomy is largely constructed. There's far more overlap than many people are willing to comfortably admit.

 

More fundamentally, what is "GAY" about his performance? Is it the way he expressed tenderness or affection or the heat in his eyes when they were about to have sex? The erotic tension? All I saw on the screen was two people who were magnetically drawn to each other and how that played out. Actors are trained differently and I don't know who his teachers were, but I'd wager he was using powerful memories from his life (probably his first love) to create his emotive expressions and channel those feelings into his performance. What you saw as "GAY" was probably a witnessing of the first time he fell in love in real life and how it felt for him as expressed through the lenses of the script and character he was asked to create.

 

Also, remember, what we see on screen has been carefully constructed by a director, cinematographer, and editor to name just three of the key players. Again, styles vary, but sometimes many takes of a scene are required before the key players believe they "got it" for that scene. It's only in the editing and post-production work that all of those "got it" scenes are stitched together to create the movie we see. We have no idea if or how many times he may have been told to "give more passion!"

 

What is GAY about his performance is his intimacy and sexual chemistry WITH A MAN, not something normally attributed to a str8 male. Of course acting is a set of skills, but not all actors are that accomplished that can make GAY look convincing... My opinion ...I am not looking for confirmation or approval.

[LivingnLA]

What is GAY about his performance is his intimacy and sexual chemistry WITH A MAN, not something normally attributed to a str8 male. Of course acting is a set of skills, but not all actors are that accomplished that can make GAY look convincing... My opinion ...I am not looking for confirmation or approval.

 

That's what makes a good actor! You're quite right. He makes it look convincing, probably with coaching and help from the director, script, etc.

[TruthBTold]

That is why I think the performances (actually Heath Ledger) is credible because he was able to portray a man growing up with a particular past (with very little love at all) in a community that has what would seem like very little, if any, affirmation of being gay (in fact his father forces him to witness the consequences of being gay in his town) coming to terms with his being gay and all that meant in his life. This would include his betrayal of his fiancé and later wife and his continuing to do so. It would also include the gay relationship's effect on his children. I think he was quite effective. I guess Jake Gyllenhaal gave an effective performance because in reality he seemed like someone who was more aggressive and who had accepted a lot about himself before meeting Heath Ledger so he had less far to go. Brokeback Mountain (put out over a decade ago) and Call Me By Your Name are much different films and so it is hard to compare them.

Edited January 9, 2018 by TruthBTold

[TruHart1]

That is why I think the performances (actually Heath Ledger) credible is that he was able to portray a man growing up with a particular past (with very little love at all) in a community that has what would seem like very little, if any, affirmation of being gay coming to terms with his being gay and all that meant in his life. This would include his betrayal of his fiancé and later wife and his continuing to do so. It would also include the gay relationship's effect on his children. I think he was quite effective. I guess Jake Gyllenhaal gave an effective performance because in reality he seemed like someone who was more aggressive and who had accepted a lot about him before meeting Heath Ledger so he had less far to go. I guess Brokeback Mountain (put out over a decade ago) and Call Me By Your Name are much different films and so it is hard to compare them.

Call Me By Your Name and Brokeback Mountain are quite different and are not really alike, mainly because a female protagonist could easily be substituted for Armie Hammer's character Oliver, without much adjustment to the screenplay, which depicts a 17-year old's sexual awakening and coming of age. The sex of his first real love is irrelevant. Of course, the movie might be unremarkable were it not about a boy's crush on an older man, since there's no way of knowing if the lyricism, beauty of cinematography and music might have worked as well in a straight love story.

 

Unlike CMBYN, Brokeback completely hinges on the fact of "forbidden" gay love, which ends up destroying both men's lives by the end of the movie. Ang Lee, who directed Brokeback Mountain, also directed a much lighter take on a gay relationship in his 1993 comedy, The Wedding Banquet, about a Taiwan born man who decides to appease his parents by going through with an arranged wedding to a bride picked for him by his parents, with the help of his long time gay lover. It's a lovely and quite funny comedy of errors which has a wonderful, happy ending for all involved.

 

TruHart1

[TruHart1]

James Franco Hosted A Dinner With His Fellow Golden Globe Nominees

 

http://highlighthollywood.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/26067299_140906613262717_3287600759880810496_n.jpg

http://highlighthollywood.com/2018/01/james-franco-hosted-a-dinner-with-his-fellow-golden-globe-nominees/

 

TruHart1

[OCClient]

When Franco signed my copy of his book, he came across as such a sweet, genuine man. He's less homophobic then most gay dudes.

 

Fun to see AH and TC socializing with these guys.

Edited January 9, 2018 by OCClient

[jjkrkwood]

[LivingnLA]

This may be one of my favorite press pics for these two. They're still channeling their characters in it.

 

http://famewatcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/timothee-chalamet-gay-in-life.jpg

 

@jjkrkwood's pic above looks to me like they're tired or uncomfotable, probably of the same questions over and over again.

[+ WilliamM]

Timothee Chalamet is a guest on the "Tonight" Show, Wednesday, January 10.

[OCClient]

This may be one of my favorite press pics for these two. They're still channeling their characters in it.

 

http://famewatcher.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/timothee-chalamet-gay-in-life.jpg

 

@jjkrkwood's pic above looks to me like they're tired or uncomfotable, probably of the same questions over and over again.

 

He didn't take any audience questions at the Q&A I attended. Was a little disappointing but I don't blame him. People ask some pretty stupid sh!t. The dude asking the questions was good I thought. I expect Hammer does get tired of dopey people and could use a rest.

[Kenny]

Call Me By Your Name and Brokeback Mountain are quite different and are not really alike

Very true. CMBYN is a coming of age love story, BM is a tragedy of the closet. The first could change the genders of the protagonists, the second could not. They really are completely different.

[TruthBTold]

I did not realize that in the book the returning student is 24 years old. Is that how old the character is supposed to be in the movie because whatever you might say Armie Hammer does not look anywhere near 24. For me at least, that changes the tenor of the movie slightly. Not entirely, but slightly.

[LoveNDino]

I did not realize that in the book the returning student is 24 years old. Is that how old the character is supposed to be in the movie because whatever you might say Armie Hammer does not look anywhere near 24. For me at least, that changes the tenor of the movie slightly. Not entirely, but slightly.

24

[TruthBTold]

It is weird because when I saw the movie I had not read the book and barely knew anything about the story. When I went to see it I assumed from seeing Mr. Hammer that Oliver was supposed to be at least 30, perhaps more. In real life he is 31 and I don't think they did anything to try to make him look or act younger. For me, a mature 17 year old having a fling (no matter how heartfelt) with a 24 year old is a bit different that a 17-year old have the same sort of thing with an engaged 31 year old. As I said FOR ME it just gives it a slight different tenor. Although I guess a broken heart is a broken heart.

[TruHart1]

I did not realize that in the book the returning student is 24 years old. Is that how old the character is supposed to be in the movie because whatever you might say Armie Hammer does not look anywhere near 24. For me at least, that changes the tenor of the movie slightly. Not entirely, but slightly.

24

It is weird because when I saw the movie I had not read the book and barely knew anything about the story. When I went to see it I assumed from seeing Mr. Hammer that Oliver was supposed to be at least 30, perhaps more. In real life he is 31 and I don't think they did anything to try to make him look or act younger. For me, a mature 17 year old having a fling (no matter how heartfelt) with a 24 year old is a bit different that a 17-year old have the same sort of thing with an engaged 31 year old. As I said FOR ME it just gives it a slight different tenor. Although I guess a broken heart is a broken heart.

The actor, Armie Hammer, born August 28, 1986, is 31 years old. BUT, the actor, Timothée Chalamet, born December 27, 1995, is 22 years old. This would make Mr. Hammer 30 years old and Mr. Chalamet 20 years old during the shooting of Call Me By Your Name a year ago. I, personally, don't think the fact that there's 10 years difference in the actor's ages instead of 7 years, makes a bit of difference.

 

The movie Luca Guadagnino wanted to film got made to his (and his producers') satisfaction and the author of the original book, André Aciman, has stated that he thinks the film is completely faithful to his original concept, even going so far as to say that the film's ending may be better than that of his book!

 

TruHart1

Edited January 10, 2018 by TruHart1

[TruthBTold]

The actor, Armie Hammer, born August 28, 1986, is 31 years old. BUT, the actor, Timothée Chalamet, born December 27, 1995, is 22 years old. This would make Mr. Hammer 30 years old and Mr. Chalamet 21 years old during the shooting of Call Me By Your Name a year ago. I, personally, don't think the fact that there's 9 years difference in the actor's ages instead of 7 years, makes a bit of difference.

The movie Luca Guadagnino wanted to film got made to his (and his producer's) satisfaction and the author of the original book, André Aciman, has stated that he thinks the film is completely faithful to his original concept, even to saying that the film's ending may be better than that of his book!

TruHart1

 

Except that in my estimation that Mr. Chalamet actually looks like he could be 17 (if that what he is presented as in the film). Mr. Hammer in no way looks like a 24 year old. This is from someone who had no preconceptions going into the movie. Why not get someone in their 20's to play the part? There are many wonderful young actors out there. I don't think Mr. Hammer brought a particular cachet to the part that would make anyone flock to the film to see it.

[TruHart1]

Except that in my estimation that Mr. Chalamet actually looks like he could be 17 (if that what he is presented as in the film). Mr. Hammer in no way looks like a 24 year old. This is from someone who had no preconceptions going into the movie. Why not get someone in their 20's to play the part? There are many wonderful young actors out there. I don't think Mr. Hammer brought a particular cachet to the part that would make anyone flock to the film to see it.

I guess I am the exception, having followed Mr. Hammer's career faithfully since he was a regular on the final 6 episodes of a little show on the CW back in 2009 called "Reaper." Yes, he's had a very up and down career but I actually thought he was better than some of his material, such as Illya Kuryakin in The Man from U.N.C.L.E. opposite Henry Cavill.

 

It appears that Chalamet is receiving most of the critics' acting accolades for this film, for being so young and yet so professionally excellent, yet with few exceptions, reviews of CMBYN will include a statement from the reviewer to the effect that Armie Hammer is as good or better in this film than in his breakthrough role(s) in The Social Network!

 

As previously stated above, if the author of the original source material, Mr. Aciman, and the director, Luca Guadagnino, who cast Mr. Hammer, are pleased with the results, then it boils down to personal taste in actors or their supposedly "too old to be 24" look. I guess I can personally buy Armie Hammer as a 24 year old American student and Timothée Chalamet as a 17 year old teen, myself.

 

Disclaimer: Your experience may vary, depending on your viewpoint! LOL

 

TruHart1

[GLEE]

I guess I am the exception, having followed Mr. Hammer's career faithfully since he was a regular on the final 6 episodes of a little show on the CW back in 2009 called "Reaper." Yes, he's had a very up and down career but I actually thought he was better than some of his material, such as Illya Kuryakin in The Man from U.N.C.L.E. opposite Henry Cavill.

 

I thought it's like 5 instead of 6...? Shoot I'm so picky..... :eek: I remember more of his performance when he later appeared on "Gossip Girl."

 

I guess I can personally buy Armie Hammer as a 24 year old American student and Timothée Chalamet as a 17 year old teen, myself.

 

I guess the "tricky" part is the movie itself does not specify it's based on the setting of the book. And I kinda don't care about the age stuff... I mean, it's Armie Hammer after all. :D

[TruHart1]

I thought it's like 5 instead of 6...? Shoot I'm so picky..... :eek: I remember more of his performance when he later appeared on "Gossip Girl."

I did love his character in Gossip Girl, too! So rich, too cool for school, and a sexy hottie (with that super-low, masculine voice!!!) to boot!!!

I guess the "tricky" part is the movie itself does not specify it's based on the setting of the book. And I kinda don't care about the age stuff... I mean, it's Armie Hammer after all. :D

I certainly am completely in agreement with what the oh, so intelligent and insightful @GLEE says!!!

 

TruHart1