The Life and Death of Peter Sellers

👍 Thumbs up.

Jose Miller17 said:Just watched it, and honestly? It’s a pretty depressing watch. Especially since it’s Peter Sellers—the whole thing leaves you feeling kind of conflicted, mostly because it tries to frame his entire career in such a wide lens. There's also one glaring issue: can this even work as a standalone movie if you don't already care about Sellers? Or how much interest could someone actually find in it if they aren't a fan? It was nice to revisit those legendary scenes, but it gets awkward when only a couple of people in the theater are laughing while everyone else is just 😕... and yeah, even Sellers barely survived being part of a Kubrick production... :-)...

Jose Miller17 brought this up ages ago... and honestly, I'm right there with him, wondering if anyone who hasn't heard of the guy will even care. It's a gamble. 😢

sigh

It strikes me as somewhat peculiar that he would engage in such discourse with Kubrick, given his notorious aversion to being patronized; I recall a period during his earlier, less established years when he actually dismissed Hollywood's premier cinematographer from the set simply for suggesting a different creative approach.

Joseph Lee3 said:Jose Miller17 brought this up ages ago... and honestly, I'm right there with him, wondering if anyone who hasn't heard of the guy will even care. It's a gamble. 😢

sigh

How much weight can we really give the opinion of someone who’s never even heard of Peter Sellers in relation to this movie?

Douglas Morales5 said:It strikes me as somewhat peculiar that he would engage in such discourse with Kubrick, given his notorious aversion to being patronized; I recall a period during his earlier, less established years when he actually dismissed Hollywood's premier cinematographer from the set simply for suggesting a different creative approach.

Oh, please—that whole dynamic with Kubrick is pure fiction, much like half the scenes we see on screen, all manufactured for the sake of "drama," you know? In reality, Sellers and Kubrick were on great terms. Even Kubrick couldn't justify his behavior to the producers, so that whole "broken leg" story was more of a silent agreement between them, largely because Kubrick held him in such high regard as an actor. In fact, Sellers was the only one ever granted permission to improvise under Kubrick's direction; nobody else before or since.

@Henry Campbell5
I'm not even sure if "relevant" is the right word here. It’s just an opinion, really—a feeling or a first impression, and not even about the movie itself, but about the man behind it. Though, then again, most people only truly know Sellers through his body of work, while this biography seems obsessed with something entirely different: his private life.

I honestly can't wrap my head around how Geoffrey managed to outshine Peter so completely. It makes no sense why he didn't walk away with the Oscar that year.

Look, can we please stop speculating about whether Americans are going to produce some watered-down version of a great British series like Blackadder unless there’s actual confirmation?😁 I nearly had a heart attack😲
...I honestly don't understand how anyone could think it's a good idea to remake a film where Peter Sellers held the lead role (I mean, Martin is fine, but really... what was he thinking?) ...Rush is a genius, truly; at certain points, you weren't even sure if it was him or if Sellers had simply risen from the grave, though I suppose that shouldn't be surprising given his previous work... but for me, his absolute best is definitely Dr. Strangelove, which is almost Kubrickian in its brilliance—truly one of a kind. The only tragic thing is how relevant the plot remains today, given all the mindless back-and-forth between the US and Iran.

And yeah, now they're remaking 12 Angry Men, though God knows who they'll actually cast for the ensemble... P. Diddy, Justin Timberlake, Freddie Prinze Jr.?😉

The film is truly excellent, though my personal highlight had to be that scene where his kid goes rogue with some white spray paint, trying to give the car a sporty makeover. Sellers loses his cool entirely, storms into the boy's room, and just starts tearing all his toys apart 🙏 🙏 🙏

Jeremy Flores10 said:I honestly can't wrap my head around how Geoffrey managed to outshine Peter so completely. It makes no sense why he didn't walk away with the Oscar that year.

I guess it's just because it's technically a TV movie. Actually, hopefully that's the reason, maybe.

Re-watched it yesterday. Still totally blown away by it.

That scene on the plane is still sooo good. And those parts with Kubrick... when Tucci leans in at one point and gives that look right under his eyebrows directly into the camera, I swear I actually saw the old devil (literally, from that shot). The casting is just phenomenal.

And that breezy directing style... it's just great. 😍

quietdriver3 said:I guess it's just because it's technically a TV movie. Actually, hopefully that's the reason, maybe.

Re-watched it yesterday. Still totally blown away by it.

That scene on the plane is still sooo good. And those parts with Kubrick... when Tucci leans in at one point and gives that look right under his eyebrows directly into the camera, I swear I actually saw the old devil (literally, from that shot). The casting is just phenomenal.

And that breezy directing style... it's just great. 😍

I had it in my head that he was nominated. I must have mixed something up.

Jeremy Flores10 said:I had it in my head that he was nominated. I must have mixed something up.

Are you sure about that? I’m not seeing it anywhere; I see the Emmy and the Golden Globe mentioned, but nothing about an Oscar.

quietdriver3 said:I guess it's just because it's technically a TV movie. Actually, hopefully that's the reason, maybe.

Re-watched it yesterday. Still totally blown away by it.

That scene on the plane is still sooo good. And those parts with Kubrick... when Tucci leans in at one point and gives that look right under his eyebrows directly into the camera, I swear I actually saw the old devil (literally, from that shot). The casting is just phenomenal.

And that breezy directing style... it's just great. 😍

Look, regardless of what anyone says about his other work, we're talking about the guy who directed Ghost and Darkness—that's a fact you just have to respect. 🙏🙏🙏

Jose Chase2 said:Look, regardless of what anyone says about his other work, we're talking about the guy who directed Ghost and Darkness—that's a fact you just have to respect. 🙏🙏🙏

But man, what was he even doing with "Lost in Space"? 🙂

quietdriver3 said:But man, what was he even doing with "Lost in Space"? 🙂

I don't get it either 😢

Did you catch his segment on tuba Tales? It was absolutely wild 🙏 🙏 🙏

There's this crowded train, right? And this incredibly gorgeous woman starts messing around—basically flashing some random guy and putting him in the most awkward spot imaginable. It was intense, seriously 🙏 🙏

Anyway, I finally sat down to watch D.O.A. 🙏 🙏

And congrats on the moderator gig 🙏 🙏

I’m going to vent for a second. While the supporting cast was absolutely stellar right up until the end, bringing in Rush felt completely out of place, if you ask me. It was just wrong, plain and simple. There was this hilarious joke floating around an old forum where someone pointed out that casting Rush to play Sellers in that relationship dynamic is like casting Patricia Routledge to play Marilyn Monroe in a biopic: sure, she’s blonde, she’s a great actress, and she could probably nail the breathy voice and the pouty lips, but come on! The fundamental energy between Rush and Sellers just doesn't align. Rush carries himself with these softer, more delicate mannerisms and has a totally different physical presence—he’s significantly taller than Sellers—not to mention the fact that watching him, you almost get the impression you're listening to Captain Barbos. 🙄

It would have been a massive improvement if they had just cast someone like Robert Downey Jr., or even Tucci—who basically played the Kubrick role here—instead of settling for Sellers. The whole experience was honestly ruined by that ridiculous pile of masks Rush was forced to lug around on his face the entire time. It was just awful. Someone put it perfectly, though: it was a total Crepes Suzette disaster.

Beyond just the physical resemblance, he completely missed the mark on the actual essence of the man. You walk away feeling like you just watched some hyperactive, cynical, extroverted drunk, which couldn't be further from how the real Sellers actually was. He was a reserved, soft-spoken guy who kept to himself and wasn't exactly the type to tear up a party or struggle with any serious vices—unless you count his obsession with marijuana. 🙂 Look, I really think people are missing the point here. Rush presented something that barely touches reality. You can debate the filmmaking, the direction, or the soundtrack all you want, but let’s be honest—this was supposed to be a biopic, for crying out loud!

It’s not like everything rests solely on the shoulders of Rush; honestly, it feels like the script was actually the heavy lifter here. Heh...

Joseph Lee3 said:I’m going to vent for a second. While the supporting cast was absolutely stellar right up until the end, bringing in Rush felt completely out of place, if you ask me. It was just wrong, plain and simple. There was this hilarious joke floating around an old forum where someone pointed out that casting Rush to play Sellers in that relationship dynamic is like casting Patricia Routledge to play Marilyn Monroe in a biopic: sure, she’s blonde, she’s a great actress, and she could probably nail the breathy voice and the pouty lips, but come on! The fundamental energy between Rush and Sellers just doesn't align. Rush carries himself with these softer, more delicate mannerisms and has a totally different physical presence—he’s significantly taller than Sellers—not to mention the fact that watching him, you almost get the impression you're listening to Captain Barbos. 🙄

It would have been a massive improvement if they had just cast someone like Robert Downey Jr., or even Tucci—who basically played the Kubrick role here—instead of settling for Sellers. The whole experience was honestly ruined by that ridiculous pile of masks Rush was forced to lug around on his face the entire time. It was just awful. Someone put it perfectly, though: it was a total Crepes Suzette disaster.

Beyond just the physical resemblance, he completely missed the mark on the actual essence of the man. You walk away feeling like you just watched some hyperactive, cynical, extroverted drunk, which couldn't be further from how the real Sellers actually was. He was a reserved, soft-spoken guy who kept to himself and wasn't exactly the type to tear up a party or struggle with any serious vices—unless you count his obsession with marijuana. 🙂 Look, I really think people are missing the point here. Rush presented something that barely touches reality. You can debate the filmmaking, the direction, or the soundtrack all you want, but let’s be honest—this was supposed to be a biopic, for crying out loud!

It’s not like everything rests solely on the shoulders of Rush; honestly, it feels like the script was actually the heavy lifter here. Heh...

wtf??? 🤷😠

Jose Chase2 said:wtf??? 🤷😠

Honestly, Downey would be a brilliant pick. I heard they reached out to Kevin Spacey first, but he passed. The whole project has basically been stuck in limbo for years because nobody wanted to touch the lead roles.

I’m not entirely sure if Downey was ever officially on the table, but the guy is fantastic—he has that slightly weathered edge and an uncanny knack for stripping away the artifice of real people. He was absolutely stellar in Attenborough's biopic about Charlie Chaplin. Just incredible.

The part that might actually blow my mind, though, is that Downey is currently prepping for a play on Broadway in New York City about Sellers. Just imagine the sheer amount of material you can pull from one poor soul; the inspiration never seems to run dry. If Sellers were still around to see this, he'd probably die of pure embarrassment. Poor guy... 😢

And don't even get me started on how Dona McKellar is basically just a rejected Sellers clone!

I don't know, there are just a few actors who get under my skin like Downey does

Joseph Lee3 said:Honestly, Downey would be a brilliant pick. I heard they reached out to Kevin Spacey first, but he passed. The whole project has basically been stuck in limbo for years because nobody wanted to touch the lead roles.

I’m not entirely sure if Downey was ever officially on the table, but the guy is fantastic—he has that slightly weathered edge and an uncanny knack for stripping away the artifice of real people. He was absolutely stellar in Attenborough's biopic about Charlie Chaplin. Just incredible.

The part that might actually blow my mind, though, is that Downey is currently prepping for a play on Broadway in New York City about Sellers. Just imagine the sheer amount of material you can pull from one poor soul; the inspiration never seems to run dry. If Sellers were still around to see this, he'd probably die of pure embarrassment. Poor guy... 😢

You're not wrong. Those are my favorite kinds of actors. The ones I hate when I first see them, and then they land a role like 'Chaplin' and just absolutely kill it. Before this movie, he was in 'Gothica'... so, does anyone actually know what his character's point was in that one?