“Ocean’s 8” – who the … needs THIS???

There is so much going on in „Shakespeare“ right now, and then THIS! I already skipped “Julius Caesar” where I had massive input from seeing THREE recent productions (by the National Theatre in the “Cinema”, and by the RSC and the Globe on DVD), but I didn’t get to write anything about it because “Hamlet” (and authenticity) got in the way. I made lots of notes not to forget any of the exciting issues that came out of the e-mail exchange about Andrew Scott’s Hamlet but didn’t get to finish any of it because it is already “Macbeth” week – National Theatre in the “Cinema” on Monday and then, if my luck holds, the RSC with Christopher Eccleston on Saturday in Stratford. (I don’t dare to believe yet that this will come to pass …), but what I ACTUALLY did this week was to put everything on hold – not just “Shakespeare”, by the way – to deal with “Ocean’s 8”!

Here follows the (hopefully) very short post where my blog temporarily becomes my therapist’s couch. I already performed some therapy by e-mailing Claudia the day after I had seen the film in an irresponsible and erratic way so that I think I got her confused to the point that she seriously considered seeing the film at the weekend, just to “deconfuse” – and I fear I will have reason to apologize big time if she does … Like most Germans I HATE apologizing. So, WHY did I do THIS???

As there isn’t a real therapist present in my blog there is no point in asking if I am actually mad, or (as Claudia put it) perverse, or just weird. And if weird – if it is “good weird” or “bad weird”. (I very much like “good weird”.) Instead I knew that I HAD to figure out what all this had been about, and, as usual, I did. I figured it out Saturday morning waiting for my train which was late. On the train I instantly started to write, and, as usual, this did the trick. Since the twitter incident about Richard Armitage on “Ocean’s 8” I had been on red alert, and the first thing I did was to buy a ticket in advance so that I would HAVE to see it – though I already knew that there wouldn’t be time. But not seeing it wasn’t an option because I knew that was the only way to get rid of the weirdness. I KNEW that I needed to “update” Richard Armitage.  

Even though he probably received a considerable upgrade as a public person playing in this kind of film, and by what happened on twitter, I already anticipated that I would have to downgrade him as an actor. And I so HATE downgrading. I knew how much when I remembered how insanely pleased I was of being able to upgrade Sean Bean, whom I had constantly had to downgrade after “The Lord of the Rings”, because of Tracey, and how sorry I still am that I will probably not be able to upgrade Ray Winstone ever again. And how cross I had been with Michael Fassbender because of Mr Rochester … I knew it would break my heart – if I had one – to downgrade Richard Armitage and was running a massive “acid attack” of irony in advance just to AVOID downgrading. Of course this is what made me so skittish and almost insufferable. Nonetheless I HAD to do the updating - and THIS actually is a good thing!

 I did it even though I knew that it was unfair. This kind of thing has very little to do with real acting, it’s just about confidence and looking gorgeous, and maybe this was the problem. I don’t know, and I know I shouldn’t care. It was probably just a misjudgement as to casting which happens sometimes. (The critic who accidentally triggered the shit storm on twitter was probably right about this! He didn’t really fit in. Which isn’t actually such a bad thing if I am thinking about it …) And, as I assume, bad writing as well: certain actors may be out of their depth and unconvincing when there is nothing for them to ACT – which isn’t actually such a bad thing either. He might even have been looking desperately for some occasion for acting and grabbed it with both hands when it came – as in the rather outworn scene where the man is handcuffed in bed by the woman and left there looking stupid. This time it actually turned out funny – not least because of the very short but inspired “foreplay”. But this made me wonder if more of this might not have improved the character – who requires a strange and rather tricky mixture of being ridiculous AND seductive.

I know that I shouldn’t care because nobody gives a shit about acting in a film that is just about telling the same story over again because of the product placement. Nonetheless I was grateful for actors who doggedly ignored this and could be bothered to act, like - actually! -  Sandra Bullock. Of course she played the main character and got a bit more screen time to show off. (I loved her German!) Before this I had successfully avoided films with Sandra Bullock – which hadn’t been the least bit difficult. Cate Blanchett did confident and gorgeous extremely convincingly, as was to be expected, but she has become kind of a female Patrick Stewart by now. She doesn’t actually have to DO something to convince me. This time she came very close to playing a chair …

I notice that “Ocean’s 8” made me quite ungracious towards my favourites. I wonder why …? (The bad writing was certainly not Cate Blanchett’s fault either!) But I will continue in this vain and conclude mentioning James Corden – British actor from London whom probably nobody knows outside of Great Britain - why should they?! … I did. He delighted me already playing a guy called Craig Owen in Doctor Who. In “Ocean’s 8” he was the insurance detective who “solved” the case and got Claude Becker (Richard Armitage) into jail (– who managed to look genuinely shocked and very ill at ease in this scene …) JAMES CORDEN - walked in, made ALL these (more or less) famous actors (including Cate Blanchett) shrink and increased the fun level of the film by about 60 percent. I just LOVED this – and it was the reason I came to like “Ocean’s 8” after all.