Um Limite Entre Nós

I didn't like this movie as much as I expected to. Sorry. The movie centers around Troy Maxon (Denzel Washington), a father to two boys of different mothers, a husband to Rose (played wonderfully by Viola Davis) for the past 18 years, an ex-con, a garbage man, and above all, an ordinary black man in the 1950's.

No doubt it was a powerful script that most likely created an incredible play but it was not meant for the screen. It was obvious that it was a play, in the way they spoke and entered a room and carried themselves in a scene. I, of course, have not seen the play so I cannot speak with 100% certainty but I feel like the script wasn't adapted for the screen at all. It's not like it needed any major changes, just a few here and there to improve clarity. The passage of time confused me throughout. A scene would end and it would be the next day, then a minute passes and it abruptly jumps to six months later with no indication. This could be a statement on how his life passed quickly and routinely, but it felt like a swing and a miss for me.

Viola Davis was wonderful. She deserves every award coming her way. I could sing songs of praise about how magnificent she was. 10/10 for her. Beautiful.

Denzel Washington was certainly egging for an Oscar as he did what he did, but that's not degrading his performance. He did do good, but it was a bit distracting when he stole the show and didn't really let the other actors bounce off each other and him as much. It was all about him.

Even though I constantly found myself criticizing this movie, I did like it. It had a magnitude that I cannot explain, otherwise I would've given it a much lower rating. I recommend this if you are willing to. I will warn you, it is tough to sit through a movie with no one to root for. Washington's character is not a good person and very unlikable, you don't really want to cheer him on.

I would give this film a good 7.5 out of 10 stars. I read some mixed reviews about this film and I'm on the side that says it's good, a bit long for what it was trying to deliver, but good. This film didn't need all of the thrills or heavy duty suspense to stay afloat. With brilliant and top notch actors like Denzel Washington and Viola Davis playing the leads their performances alone will make this film something worth seeing. Being that this film is from a stage play it's almost as if this were just a stage play done on a movie set, that's probably why it had so many bad reviews but I think the director (Denzel Washington) wanted it that way. This is purely a drama film delivered well by some of the most brilliant acting I have ever seen. I must admit, it does take a little while for the story to get good but it's well worth the wait. If you're into drama filled experiences with lots of symbolism and good acting I highly recommend this film.

A very strong emotional performance by the great Denzel Washington, not his best per say but it gives us everything we love about this great actor. A well driven vehicle for Washington as well as well made by Washington who also directed the film.

Denzel and Viola Davis were a pretty outstanding combination. It seems like a no brainier that one day these two would work together on this level and here it is. It was worth seeing just to see these two as a couple going through their hard times.

It's a very basic movie, despite putting some money into the CGI to make it look like the 1950s, it all takes place in one area and relies a lot on the experience actors and the performances they give, so little is done to change the tone. It really feels like the movie is giving us a Broadway production.

It was also very gritty. Denzel and Viola gave some real life to these characters. It's very rare that you get the movie star whose also an actor and he's unafraid to open up, but that's what Denzel does and so did Viola, just not afraid to let it all hang out for the role.

Worth seeing to see some real craftsmanship in acting. It was a great movie adaption to a great play.

http://cinemagardens.com

If I hadn't known what Fences was going in, I would have been able to tell before any color hit the screen. In a second before the vibrant world of Fences fades into view, the astute theater-goer will recognize the fast-paced almost narrative cadence of two characters talking as lines written for a stage play. Fences is an adaptation of August Wilson's 1987 play, a part of his Pittsburgh Cycle. It won the Pulitzer Price for Drama in as well as the Tony Award for Best Play, repeating this with the Tony Award for Best Revival of a Play in 2010.

We're not venturing into mere trivia either, as that revival starred Denzel Washington and Viola Davis (both taking Tonys for their acting). Not only do both reprise their roles in this film, but Denzel Washington directs. This probably explains why Washington puts in such a theater-like performance. For him, it must have felt like stepping into old shoes with very little desire for change. As I alluded, those accustomed with the stage will recognize and probably even like the kind of performance that at all times demands audience attention, as on stage, you have to do exactly that. In movie form, some might confuse it for scene-chewing, but either way, it gives his character a larger than life affability. As is said in the movie, his ability to fill a house could apply as much to his small house in universe as it could to a theater house. It goes a long way to explaining why in the end, these characters have such a strange respect for a man who is such a heinous character.

If it seems like I'm only praising Washington's performance as relatively good, that might be because he shares the screen with Viola Davis. Davis's performance is not only more suited for film, a medium she has taken by storm lately, but it's also transcendentally fantastic in its own right. In one pivotal scene, Davis's character pours her heart as the actress pours tears and snot down her face. It's not many movies that I can leave and think, boy, we really should have more snot in our films. When it comes to movies, I like to think of myself as an everyman. I approach the Oscars with a sort of double-speak. There's the film that should win (Moana), and there's the film that should win and has a chance (Hell or High Water). In a rare moment of finding these opinions in concert, I could only describe the possibility of Viola Davis not taking home the Best Actress Award with one word: ridiculous.

Denzel Washington certainly doesn't need to feel upstaged. While August Wilson wrote the screenplay himself before passing away in 2005 (a little uncredited work was done on it by Tony Kushner, who settled for a co-producer credit), it's still no small feat to take something designed for the small stage putting it on a film screen. A while the film is still more than a bit obvious, I think Washington really did as much as he could to make it as a good a movie as it could be. There are few real scenes and constant talk, but there's just as much constant motion. Characters walk down a crowded street, transition through the house, come in and off screen organically. It gives a similar effect as if a long scene was done in take. But none of this would matter if it weren't for the impeccable set design. Taking place in the actual Hill District of Pittsburgh that was so important to Wilson's stories, the recreation of the 1950s feels almost too alive. The back alley where the eponymous fence is being built is very reminiscent of the set of Rear Window, perhaps smaller in scale, but feeling no less lived in.

Fences is a film built upon quite a pedigree, but what is it about? I believe that Fences is a story about masculinity. In the film, masculinity provides. It helps you ensure that get what you are owed. But masculinity also takes. Troy Maxson (Washington) is an old man obsessed with what he believes the world owes him. The world owed him glory in sports. The world owed him a better profession. A better standard of living. He even believes that the Grim Reaper owes him life. Even though there are legitimate arguments as to why he never obtains these things, we can still say that they are fair wishes. But as the movie progresses, we see that when he tries to take the things he's owed, he doesn't necessarily think about who he's taking from or what they are owed.

Due to its strict adaptation, Fences is extremely dense in its amount of talking compared to other films. The depth this gives to its characters and sheer literature value certainly goes a long way to cement Fences as one of the smartest films of the season. But I have to be a little self-aware and recognize that as a source of entertainment, Fences probably appealed to me mostly as a man who enjoys the stage. Others might not be as indulgent with it as I am.

This film is about a man. A man who carries the burden of generations of hardship, who couldn't fulfill his own greatest dreams because of the oppressive context in which he lived and who tries to close himself off from the world with fences. Tragically, in closing himself off he loses site of the changing times, he boxes his loved-ones in, and he creates an oppressive environment that emulates everything he tried to guard against. The timeless question lies within this story (adapted from a Pulitzer winning play) is: can we hate a man like this? Or, when we consider his circumstances and trials, is he a hero to admire?

It's worth seeing and is worthy of praise. If not from the acting (particularly Viola's), from the captivating and poetic screenplay. Every word uttered seems calculated by the mind of a genius.