Steinway & Sons

Huge thanks to NPR for airing The Piano; the movie was incredible, especially that soundtrack. Definitely worth a watch..

Man, I can never bring myself to watch a movie from start to finish—I always end up jumping in somewhere around the middle... 😠

Just a total flop... 👍 🙏

Just finished watching. Really beautiful film...🙂

A real woman's movie... but in the best way possible... 🙂

Wait, you mean I still haven't seen that movie????? 😕 😕 😕 I guess I just don't have it at my place 😈

Holly Hunter 🙏
She’s just absolutely phenomenal, I guess.

...no matter how bizarre it felt—given he’s been on NPR or something similar so many times before—watching him for the first time actually left me feeling a bit let down... it has its perks, sure (there's that lovely atmosphere built by the phenomenal music—the way the melodies contrast between scenes, specifically those with George versus the ones with her husband, I practically froze 🙂; there's the adorable little Anna Paquin and an unusually striking—if slightly unhinged—Robert De Niro; there's an overwhelming amount of beautiful—if occasionally over-the-top—symbolism; it has a gorgeous opening and a sooo beautiful ending...), but I still couldn't shake the feeling that I was watching a cookie-cutter exploitation flick. It exploits the setting and context just to pretend it has depth, and it exploits emotions just to squeeze out emotions. Then there's that tired, repetitive trope of the unloved man who can only ever become the "aggressor"—he's really just a catalyst for the other events, but he isn't even a caricature, let alone a fully realized character (and it's always been this way since Meat—well, even before that, but Baptiste's wife is the first person who comes to mind, and she was a much stronger "character" than this guy, since Neill's character doesn't truly exist—at least until Jane Campion arrived....)...I don't know, I spent the whole time thinking the film would be drastically better if it were "stripped down," taken out of its context and presented as a study of the "layers" between the characters. It would be fascinating to see how a slightly "grittier" director would handle it (my picks would be either Michel Chereau or Michael Haneke 🙂, though I suppose Arnold could do a good job too, but maybe I'm still just under the spell...)
...but even so, I have to admit, I was moved by 🙂

...but one thing occurred to me while watching—Matanović's "Fame" owes more to this than any other film 🙂 (some scenes are almost identical copies...)

It’s not a Trumpeter, and it's not just any piano—it's a Steinway & Sons. 🙂

...our NPR employees translated the Trumpeter, so I just posted it that way too 🙂 but I'm fixing it now per orders 🙂

Michael Nyman is this composer who basically builds everything on a foundation of Scottish music and stuff like that. It’s absolutely stunning music, but man, it is incredibly difficult to play.

Larry Martin11 said:...no matter how bizarre it felt—given he’s been on NPR or something similar so many times before—watching him for the first time actually left me feeling a bit let down... it has its perks, sure (there's that lovely atmosphere built by the phenomenal music—the way the melodies contrast between scenes, specifically those with George versus the ones with her husband, I practically froze 🙂; there's the adorable little Anna Paquin and an unusually striking—if slightly unhinged—Robert De Niro; there's an overwhelming amount of beautiful—if occasionally over-the-top—symbolism; it has a gorgeous opening and a sooo beautiful ending...), but I still couldn't shake the feeling that I was watching a cookie-cutter exploitation flick. It exploits the setting and context just to pretend it has depth, and it exploits emotions just to squeeze out emotions. Then there's that tired, repetitive trope of the unloved man who can only ever become the "aggressor"—he's really just a catalyst for the other events, but he isn't even a caricature, let alone a fully realized character (and it's always been this way since Meat—well, even before that, but Baptiste's wife is the first person who comes to mind, and she was a much stronger "character" than this guy, since Neill's character doesn't truly exist—at least until Jane Campion arrived....)...I don't know, I spent the whole time thinking the film would be drastically better if it were "stripped down," taken out of its context and presented as a study of the "layers" between the characters. It would be fascinating to see how a slightly "grittier" director would handle it (my picks would be either Michel Chereau or Michael Haneke 🙂, though I suppose Arnold could do a good job too, but maybe I'm still just under the spell...)
...but even so, I have to admit, I was moved by 🙂

...but one thing occurred to me while watching—Matanović's "Fame" owes more to this than any other film 🙂 (some scenes are almost identical copies...)

I finally sat down to catch it last night, too! I've had it on my list for ages, but I ended up feeling pretty disappointed myself... it just feels like it's missing so much, you know? Like it’s a bit unfinished. It feels somewhat hollow, and there are so many parts that could have been polished up. It's such a shame because the story really does have potential... though, I suppose it was worth the watch just to see little Anna Paquin; she is absolutely fantastic 🙏.

I liked it. A few standout moments: when they sell their body for the Steinway & Sons, that finger scene (didn't see that coming 😲), the leg placement, the ending... the colors in the film too... there are so many 🙏 blues, greens, grays? Naturally, Holly Hunter deserved the Oscar.

Larry Martin11 said:...no matter how bizarre it felt—given he’s been on NPR or something similar so many times before—watching him for the first time actually left me feeling a bit let down... it has its perks, sure (there's that lovely atmosphere built by the phenomenal music—the way the melodies contrast between scenes, specifically those with George versus the ones with her husband, I practically froze 🙂; there's the adorable little Anna Paquin and an unusually striking—if slightly unhinged—Robert De Niro; there's an overwhelming amount of beautiful—if occasionally over-the-top—symbolism; it has a gorgeous opening and a sooo beautiful ending...), but I still couldn't shake the feeling that I was watching a cookie-cutter exploitation flick. It exploits the setting and context just to pretend it has depth, and it exploits emotions just to squeeze out emotions. Then there's that tired, repetitive trope of the unloved man who can only ever become the "aggressor"—he's really just a catalyst for the other events, but he isn't even a caricature, let alone a fully realized character (and it's always been this way since Meat—well, even before that, but Baptiste's wife is the first person who comes to mind, and she was a much stronger "character" than this guy, since Neill's character doesn't truly exist—at least until Jane Campion arrived....)...I don't know, I spent the whole time thinking the film would be drastically better if it were "stripped down," taken out of its context and presented as a study of the "layers" between the characters. It would be fascinating to see how a slightly "grittier" director would handle it (my picks would be either Michel Chereau or Michael Haneke 🙂, though I suppose Arnold could do a good job too, but maybe I'm still just under the spell...)
...but even so, I have to admit, I was moved by 🙂

...but one thing occurred to me while watching—Matanović's "Fame" owes more to this than any other film 🙂 (some scenes are almost identical copies...)

ATTENTION! ATTENTION!
We have a new Blue Eyes here!

...😳 what?

Ever since I first sat down to watch it, this has been my absolute favorite movie, hands down. 😍
And honestly, I’m just going to leave it at that...

Larry Martin11 said:...😳 what?

Don't worry about it... It’s just one of those inside jokes among us old-timers on the forums. I think someone finally caught on. 😉

A truly stunning film. It’s mystical, tender, and deeply calming...😍