What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Recently viewed movie thread - Rental Edition (4 Viewers)

KarmaPolice said:
Gravity:

I have sooo many conflicting emotions about this movie. First of all, I will fully admit that I whiffed on this one and it really needs to be seen on the biggest screen with the best sound possible. You need to immerse yourself in this one. Why I didn't trust my gut and go see this in 3D when it came out I don't know.

My conflicts:

1. The camera work was great - there was a fantastic 12-15min opening shot that had amazing movement/switching POVs. However, it is mostly CGI, so I battle with comparing that to this other great long takes in Children of Men. It doesn't stack up because you have so many more variables when you have to coordinate actors, cameras, etc.. it increases the difficulty a bit more.

2. I fully expected to be annoyed by Bullock and I usually like Clooney, but the opposite happened for me.

3. I was very ballsy in it's choice of hardly any sound besides the soundtrack. Impressive to stick with your guns an design it so it would mimic what it might sound like in that situation. However, sometimes that put the focus on the soundtrack more than normal and does give you extended periods of just listening to Sandra breathing heavily.

4. Sometimes it really trusted the audience and their intelligence - the choice of sound, sometimes the way they expertly showed something in a different way that might have meaning vs. sometimes they beat you over the head with some dialogue or symbolism and made it seem amateurish.

5. Does a visual spectacle alone make it a great movie that should be praised so heavily, or did it lack too many things in the plot, dialogue, etc to make it a great movie?

In the end, I think the overall experience definitely outweighed my nitpicks. I was watching it on a pretty crappy setup and was still at the edge of my seat. I would put this in the realm of Avatar - IMO more of a movie experience and less a great movie. However, I think the technical talent of this movie >>> Avatar. Camera work, sound design, etc.. were amazing. In the end, no matter what I think of them, these are the kind of movies that I would love to see make a ton of money in the theater. I have had enough of fighting robots and superheroes and would like movies like Gravity and Inception make money and start seeping into the summer blockbuster season. 7.5/10
I saw it in the theater in 3d... agree with everything you're saying here. I felt like it was a solid movie- beautifully directed and acted and kept moving right along, only suffering from it's preposterously eye-rolling escapes- but I guess that was the point of the movie, so :shrug:

the 3d, though, was spectacular. most movies take more of the Avatar approach to immerse you spatially in what's going on (the whole point of using 3d)- which is that they include a bunch of subtle atmospherics (dust, falling leaves, petals, whatever) to wrap you in the space along with lots of stuff jumping out at you or falling away from you to make sure you haven't missed that, yes, this is a 3d movie. This movie used those things, but really took advantage of it's setting- space- to really give the viewer the contrassting feelings of claustrophobia in the tight spaces of the ships and capsules and the infinite expanse of space itself (always having objects near, middle and far to get that sense of infinite scale).

I think this and Avatar are the gold standards of the medium, but special props to Gravity for using it in a much more profound way (to me).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Magaw said:
Changing gears, watched the weird musical/spy spoof Top Secret! It was by Abrahams, Zucker and Zucker, who did Kentucky Fried Movie and Airplane, among others (Naked Gun, Hot Shots). Better than I remembered, though somewhat uneven, a lot of the same sight gags (guy looking through a magnifying glass has a distortedly large eye, when he pulls it away, that is how it is on his face) and word play as in their other movies.
I love Top Secret. I think it's easily as funny as Airplane!
Been working my way through some of their other movies. Naked Gun 2.5 was funnier than I remembered, similar formula with seemingly a few sight gags or word play jokes a minute.

Typical examples.

George Kennedy asks Leslie Nielsen if there is a sexual angle to the case, and says "Sex, Frank?" "Not right now." :)

At a speech/gathering, Kennedy says they have identified the criminal and points into the crowd. About a half dozen men simultaneously grab a female hostage and hold a gun to them.
Speaking of which, Police Squad. One of the funniest series ever made.
Police Squad was awesome, I remember when it aired that it bombed because people didn't get it. I guess a lot of people need the laugh track to tell them when the jokes happen and the dead pan delivery in PS without the laugh track left too many people confused. They pretty much recycled all the jokes from PS in Naked Gun.
You always wonder where they're testing these shows. Bingo games?
After meeting Priscilla Presley for the first time, Drebin says I know a great little place where they serve Viking food. She says how about a rain check. "We better stick with dinner." :)
I visited my brother right after he got into law school, and he took me to an undergrad party. We kept asking girls if they wanted to go get some viking food with us. That didn't work well, but toward the end of the night I started telling girls that my brother was in law school, we had better luck. at least he did. not much play for the table-waiting kid brother. :(

 
Homer J Simpson said:
Chaka said:
You would think a movie with Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Isla Fisher, Morgan Freeman & Michael Caine would be anything but entirely forgettable...but you would be wrong.
What movie would that be?
whatever it is, it's the cheesesteak of movies

 
KarmaPolice said:
Gravity:

I have sooo many conflicting emotions about this movie. First of all, I will fully admit that I whiffed on this one and it really needs to be seen on the biggest screen with the best sound possible. You need to immerse yourself in this one. Why I didn't trust my gut and go see this in 3D when it came out I don't know.

My conflicts:

1. The camera work was great - there was a fantastic 12-15min opening shot that had amazing movement/switching POVs. However, it is mostly CGI, so I battle with comparing that to this other great long takes in Children of Men. It doesn't stack up because you have so many more variables when you have to coordinate actors, cameras, etc.. it increases the difficulty a bit more.
I too missed the boat on the bolded. Watched it at home but really wished I had seen it in 3D.

There was one shot early before the sht hit the fan that looked amazing. The camera was zooming into Sandra's face and appeared to continue to zoom through her helmet. It looked like one continuous shot, no cuts. Learning that this was mostly CGI makes a lot of sense.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Gravity:

I have sooo many conflicting emotions about this movie. First of all, I will fully admit that I whiffed on this one and it really needs to be seen on the biggest screen with the best sound possible. You need to immerse yourself in this one. Why I didn't trust my gut and go see this in 3D when it came out I don't know.

My conflicts:

1. The camera work was great - there was a fantastic 12-15min opening shot that had amazing movement/switching POVs. However, it is mostly CGI, so I battle with comparing that to this other great long takes in Children of Men. It doesn't stack up because you have so many more variables when you have to coordinate actors, cameras, etc.. it increases the difficulty a bit more.
I too missed the boat on the bolded. Watched it at home but really wished I had seen it in 3D.

There was one shot early before the sht hit the fan that looked amazing. The camera was zooming into Sandra's face and appeared to continue to zoom through her helmet. It looked like one continuous shot, no cuts. Learning that this was mostly CGI makes a lot of sense.
might have been one if the podcasts I listen to that was talking about the process. thought they said they worked on it for about 5 years and had a lot done before casting. after that they used them to fill in faces and stuff with Sandra on the ships.

 
Alright, I was disappointed with Gravity to a degree but didnt see it in theaters either. There's a 415pm showing today in the theater that still has it, in 3D. Im going to head out to see it.

 
Watched The Bay last night.......very decent sci-fi horror flick from Barry Levinson. Had some very creepy, hee bee jee bee moments for sure. My wife enjoyed it and it affected her when we went to sleep....she had some serious hee bee jee bee's LOL.

If your into docu/cam corder type horror flicks (like Quarantine) you will really enjoy this movie.

It is based very loosely on the Chesapeeke bay incident. The movie takes place in a small town on the 4th of July 2009.

8/10

 
Watched The Bay last night.......very decent sci-fi horror flick from Barry Levinson. Had some very creepy, hee bee jee bee moments for sure. My wife enjoyed it and it affected her when we went to sleep....she had some serious hee bee jee bee's LOL.

If your into docu/cam corder type horror flicks (like Quarantine) you will really enjoy this movie.

It is based very loosely on the Chesapeeke bay incident. The movie takes place in a small town on the 4th of July 2009.

8/10
I was bored by this movie. Not sure why, as it should be in my wheelhouse.

 
Watched The Bay last night.......very decent sci-fi horror flick from Barry Levinson. Had some very creepy, hee bee jee bee moments for sure. My wife enjoyed it and it affected her when we went to sleep....she had some serious hee bee jee bee's LOL.

If your into docu/cam corder type horror flicks (like Quarantine) you will really enjoy this movie.

It is based very loosely on the Chesapeeke bay incident. The movie takes place in a small town on the 4th of July 2009.

8/10
I was bored by this movie. Not sure why, as it should be in my wheelhouse.
I am a sucker for found footage movies. I thought this one was well done. really liked the use of different types of footage- personal cameras, security cams, etc.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Gravity:

I have sooo many conflicting emotions about this movie. First of all, I will fully admit that I whiffed on this one and it really needs to be seen on the biggest screen with the best sound possible. You need to immerse yourself in this one. Why I didn't trust my gut and go see this in 3D when it came out I don't know.

My conflicts:

2. I fully expected to be annoyed by Bullock and I usually like Clooney, but the opposite happened for me.

3. I was very ballsy in it's choice of hardly any sound besides the soundtrack. Impressive to stick with your guns an design it so it would mimic what it might sound like in that situation. However, sometimes that put the focus on the soundtrack more than normal and does give you extended periods of just listening to Sandra breathing heavily.

5. Does a visual spectacle alone make it a great movie that should be praised so heavily, or did it lack too many things in the plot, dialogue, etc to make it a great movie?

In the end, I think the overall experience definitely outweighed my nitpicks. I was watching it on a pretty crappy setup and was still at the edge of my seat. I would put this in the realm of Avatar - IMO more of a movie experience and less a great movie. However, I think the technical talent of this movie >>> Avatar. Camera work, sound design, etc.. were amazing. In the end, no matter what I think of them, these are the kind of movies that I would love to see make a ton of money in the theater. I have had enough of fighting robots and superheroes and would like movies like Gravity and Inception make money and start seeping into the summer blockbuster season. 7.5/10
Ok, watching this in 3D at a theater makes it infinitely better I now have to say. I dont have the greatest TV (48" HD Panasonic Plasma) in the world, but I think even if you watch this at home on an 80" 3D TV with surround sound you still are missing on the theater experience by a lot. I agree with youre conflicts above. Clooney's schtick was pretty annoying. As far as the sound goes, that is a big difference for me comparing watching it at home vs the theater. At home, those extended sequences of nothing/breathing I found somewhat boring but in the theater if felt like a lot more was still going on.

As for your 5th conflict, IMO a visual spectacle doesnt make what Id call a great movie. After seeing it in theaters, I have more respect for it overall, but its not what Id consider Best Picture material based on the rest of it, like you said plot, dialogue. Id say the same thing about Avatar, although both that and Gravity I like more than some of what been nominated recently. Id also agree the technical talent was better here than Avatar, although the world/setting created in Avatar >>> the space shots of Gravity.

 
Non-Stop

Not bad. Not bad at all. Taught, thoughtful thriller all around. There's a huge weak spot I won't elaborate on to save spoilers, but mostly fun to watch.

 
Just watched a fantastic film called Venus. Stars Peter O'Toole as an aging actor who's not long for this world. It's bawdy and dark at times, but very sweet and fresh. Fantastic film. I can't say it any better than The New York Times:

As “Venus” moves casually along, a deep sadness starts to gather around its edges, casting a shadow over the mischievous good humor that is Maurice’s default mood. His mortality portends a larger loss, the eclipse of an approach to life and art that the great British actors of the mid-20th century, from Laurence Olivier to Michael Caine, embodied with such ease and charisma. It is not easy to define that special, paradoxical glamour Mr. O’Toole wears like a well-worn, perfectly tailored jacket — he is a self-made aristocrat, a genuine pretender, a selfless narcissist — but whatever it is, he still has it. Seeing a picture of the young Maurice — the young Peter O’Toole — in a newspaper, someone exclaims, “He were gorgeous.” Indeed he were, and so he is.
Great movie. O'Toole lays it bare. I wonder if he knew this was going to be his last big role, and so let himself go all out.

 
I thought it was outstanding :shrug:
about to ask the question, but it's not a judgement...really curious. Did you read the book?
No, and to defend your post, my son likes the books and he didn't like the way the movie changed the book.

The more book-to-film adaptations I watched, the more I'm convinced that lovers of any given books should just avoid the movies altogether. Never seems to make the more more enjoyable, and always seems to disappoint.
I've found that I always prefer the format I experience first. For the Lord of the Rings, I watched the movies first then read the books. I hated the books. Fight Club and Jurassic Park I again watched the movies first and then read the books. I prefer the movies. For Ender's Game, The Hobbit, and The Great Gatsby I read the books first and ended up hating the movies. I could probably find more examples.

Of course the books are available before the movies, so it isn't surprising to me that most people prefer books over their movie adaptations.

 
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.

 
Thor Dark World. Solid. I have to admit that I really like the cast. All of them. They just seem to fit their roles well or are doing a good job entertaining me.

 
Encyclopedia Brown said:
Just watched a fantastic film called Venus. Stars Peter O'Toole as an aging actor who's not long for this world. It's bawdy and dark at times, but very sweet and fresh. Fantastic film. I can't say it any better than The New York Times:

As “Venus” moves casually along, a deep sadness starts to gather around its edges, casting a shadow over the mischievous good humor that is Maurice’s default mood. His mortality portends a larger loss, the eclipse of an approach to life and art that the great British actors of the mid-20th century, from Laurence Olivier to Michael Caine, embodied with such ease and charisma. It is not easy to define that special, paradoxical glamour Mr. O’Toole wears like a well-worn, perfectly tailored jacket — he is a self-made aristocrat, a genuine pretender, a selfless narcissist — but whatever it is, he still has it. Seeing a picture of the young Maurice — the young Peter O’Toole — in a newspaper, someone exclaims, “He were gorgeous.” Indeed he were, and so he is.
Great movie. O'Toole lays it bare. I wonder if he knew this was going to be his last big role, and so let himself go all out.
Sounds logical. I'm sure I've said this before, but while Hollywood prefers movies about young people because they're more profitable, I think older actors are often better at their craft.

 
sports_fan said:
I thought it was outstanding :shrug:
about to ask the question, but it's not a judgement...really curious. Did you read the book?
No, and to defend your post, my son likes the books and he didn't like the way the movie changed the book.

The more book-to-film adaptations I watched, the more I'm convinced that lovers of any given books should just avoid the movies altogether. Never seems to make the more more enjoyable, and always seems to disappoint.
I've found that I always prefer the format I experience first. For the Lord of the Rings, I watched the movies first then read the books. I hated the books. Fight Club and Jurassic Park I again watched the movies first and then read the books. I prefer the movies. For Ender's Game, The Hobbit, and The Great Gatsby I read the books first and ended up hating the movies. I could probably find more examples.

Of course the books are available before the movies, so it isn't surprising to me that most people prefer books over their movie adaptations.
Some things in novels aren't filmmable. And sometimes an interesting thing to read isn't all that interesting to watch in a film. If you use other art forms as an analogy, a painting of Pulp Fiction couldn't cover everything in the film - nor should it.

 
Just finished Gravity in 3D on my home projector. I enjoyed it very much and I thought the lack of collision sounds made the movie even tense than it already was. I also agree the silence except for heavy breathing was pretty effective. I actually ducked once or twice during the scenes where the stations were be hit by the debris.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sports_fan said:
I thought it was outstanding :shrug:
about to ask the question, but it's not a judgement...really curious. Did you read the book?
No, and to defend your post, my son likes the books and he didn't like the way the movie changed the book.

The more book-to-film adaptations I watched, the more I'm convinced that lovers of any given books should just avoid the movies altogether. Never seems to make the more more enjoyable, and always seems to disappoint.
I've found that I always prefer the format I experience first. For the Lord of the Rings, I watched the movies first then read the books. I hated the books. Fight Club and Jurassic Park I again watched the movies first and then read the books. I prefer the movies. For Ender's Game, The Hobbit, and The Great Gatsby I read the books first and ended up hating the movies. I could probably find more examples.

Of course the books are available before the movies, so it isn't surprising to me that most people prefer books over their movie adaptations.
Forrest Gump was a much better book than movie, even though I'm one of the few that thinks the movie was pretty spectacular. He was autistic in the book, which made a lot of things much more believable.

I think he was 6'4", 240, which made the football stuff more believable.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watched Don Jon last night with the wife. Lots of T&A, but overall the worst movie I have seen in a LONG time!!!

 
Captain America. Another solid one. I think I have now seen every marvel offering for avengers purposes. I am really entertained how they connect them all. Solid job.

Iron Man was clearly the best of all of them. And as I've said before I'm really liking the Thor movies alot.

 
Chaka said:
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.
She was robbed. Fantastic performance.
Haven't seen Nebraska but Im surprised the 12 Years A Slave girl was even nominated let alone won BSA. Yeah, she was good, but I never thought whoa, this is an amazing performance, who is this girl.

If we're giving Oscars to no-name African actors, I think Barkhad Abdi shouldve won over Leto, and I really liked Leto in DBC.

 
Chaka said:
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.
She was robbed. Fantastic performance.
Haven't seen Nebraska but Im surprised the 12 Years A Slave girl was even nominated let alone won BSA. Yeah, she was good, but I never thought whoa, this is an amazing performance, who is this girl.

If we're giving Oscars to no-name African actors, I think Barkhad Abdi shouldve won over Leto, and I really liked Leto in DBC.
I won't go so far as to say Squibb was robbed but I was disappointed.

Lupito Nyong'o earned her Oscar and Sally Hawkins gave excellent performance as well in Blue Jasmine. It was a strong field for best supporting actress.

Barkhad Abdi was quite good but nowhere near the caliber of performance Leto gave in DBC. I think Leto's win was a mortal lock.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
Her character was a city girl, something she was quite proud of.

Either way I don't care about that kind of authenticity, if it is authentic, her performance was outstanding.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
I think her character was too much in general. I guess that is more the filmakers fault than hers. said it in here, but the cemetery scene killed her character for me.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
She didn't write the script. She just performed the role.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
I think her character was too much in general. I guess that is more the filmakers fault than hers. said it in here, but the cemetery scene killed her character for me.
:goodposting:

Felt the exact same way. I also thought Bruce Dern's character was too much in general. Toning those two characters down and giving them an ounce of subtlety would have better served the movie imo.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
Her character was a city girl, something she was quite proud of.

Either way I don't care about that kind of authenticity, if it is authentic, her performance was outstanding.
"City" or not, that's not how people act there.

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
Her character was a city girl, something she was quite proud of.

Either way I don't care about that kind of authenticity, if it is authentic, her performance was outstanding.
"City" or not, that's not how people act there.
I think that you are, perhaps, generalizing a bit.

 
Someone in Hollywood must hate Roger Deakins. He was nominated for the 10th time last night for Best Cinematography, and he lost yet again. Most cinematographers would kill for this resume:

2013 Prisoners (director of photography)
2012 Skyfall (director of photography)
2010 True Grit (director of photography)
2009 A Serious Man (director of photography)
2008 Revolutionary Road (director of photography)
2008 The Reader (director of photography)
2008 Doubt (director of photography)
2007 The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (director of photography)
2007 In the Valley of Elah (director of photography)
2007 No Country for Old Men (director of photography)
2005 Jarhead (director of photography)
2004 The Village (director of photography)
2004 The Ladykillers (director of photography)
2003 House of Sand and Fog
2003 Intolerable Cruelty (director of photography)
2001 A Beautiful Mind (director of photography)
2001 The Man Who Wasn't There
2000 O Brother, Where Art Thou? (director of photography)
1998 The Big Lebowski
1997 Kundun
1996 Fargo (director of photography)
1995 Dead Man Walking (director of photography - as Roger A. Deakins)
1994 The Shawshank Redemption (director of photography)
1994 The Hudsucker Proxy (director of photography)
1993 The Secret Garden
1991 Barton Fink (director of photography)
1986 Sid and Nancy

 
Squibb was way over the top with the foul language and it was unrealistic of someone living there. Believe me, I'm from Iowa and I have family who are spitting images of these people. The rest of her performance was realistic but the language needed to be toned down.
Her character was a city girl, something she was quite proud of.

Either way I don't care about that kind of authenticity, if it is authentic, her performance was outstanding.
"City" or not, that's not how people act there.
I think that you are, perhaps, generalizing a bit.
How about this - in the 30 years I lived there I never met a person like that.

 
Chaka said:
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.
She was robbed. Fantastic performance.
Haven't seen Nebraska but Im surprised the 12 Years A Slave girl was even nominated let alone won BSA. Yeah, she was good, but I never thought whoa, this is an amazing performance, who is this girl.

If we're giving Oscars to no-name African actors, I think Barkhad Abdi shouldve won over Leto, and I really liked Leto in DBC.
I won't go so far as to say Squibb was robbed but I was disappointed.

Lupito Nyong'o earned her Oscar and Sally Hawkins gave excellent performance as well in Blue Jasmine. It was a strong field for best supporting actress.

Barkhad Abdi was quite good but nowhere near the caliber of performance Leto gave in DBC. I think Leto's win was a mortal lock.
How? By getting raped and whipped in 12YAS she earned an Oscar? I just watched it on thursday and thought pretty much everything about it was very good but not great, and really her performance wasnt something that stoodout to me when I put the film in that context either.

I thought Abdi carried Captain Phillips on his back and without him I dont think that film is near as good or suspenseful or even considered to be a Best Picture nominee. With as good as Leto's performance was, I cant say the same about him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka said:
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.
She was robbed. Fantastic performance.
Haven't seen Nebraska but Im surprised the 12 Years A Slave girl was even nominated let alone won BSA. Yeah, she was good, but I never thought whoa, this is an amazing performance, who is this girl.

If we're giving Oscars to no-name African actors, I think Barkhad Abdi shouldve won over Leto, and I really liked Leto in DBC.
I won't go so far as to say Squibb was robbed but I was disappointed.

Lupito Nyong'o earned her Oscar and Sally Hawkins gave excellent performance as well in Blue Jasmine. It was a strong field for best supporting actress.

Barkhad Abdi was quite good but nowhere near the caliber of performance Leto gave in DBC. I think Leto's win was a mortal lock.
How? By getting raped and whipped in 12YAS she earned an Oscar? I just watched it on thursday and thought pretty much everything about it was very good but not great, and really her performance wasnt something that stoodout to me when I put the film in that context either.

I thought Abdi carried Captain Phillips on his back and without him I dont think that film is near as good or suspenseful or even considered to be a Best Picture nominee. With as good as Leto's performance was, I cant say the same about him.
We're clearly not going to agree on Nyong'o but I thought everything about the way she carried herself in the film was top notch.

Abdi was very good but I don't think his role was nearly as challenging as what Leto did for DBC, and I am not talking about the weight loss.

 
Chaka said:
Nebraska - A little slow but quirky and fun. I really hope June Squibb takes the Oscar tonight she was absolutely delightful and completely carried the film.
She was robbed. Fantastic performance.
Haven't seen Nebraska but Im surprised the 12 Years A Slave girl was even nominated let alone won BSA. Yeah, she was good, but I never thought whoa, this is an amazing performance, who is this girl.

If we're giving Oscars to no-name African actors, I think Barkhad Abdi shouldve won over Leto, and I really liked Leto in DBC.
I won't go so far as to say Squibb was robbed but I was disappointed.

Lupito Nyong'o earned her Oscar and Sally Hawkins gave excellent performance as well in Blue Jasmine. It was a strong field for best supporting actress.

Barkhad Abdi was quite good but nowhere near the caliber of performance Leto gave in DBC. I think Leto's win was a mortal lock.
How? By getting raped and whipped in 12YAS she earned an Oscar? I just watched it on thursday and thought pretty much everything about it was very good but not great, and really her performance wasnt something that stoodout to me when I put the film in that context either.

I thought Abdi carried Captain Phillips on his back and without him I dont think that film is near as good or suspenseful or even considered to be a Best Picture nominee. With as good as Leto's performance was, I cant say the same about him.
We're clearly not going to agree on Nyong'o but I thought everything about the way she carried herself in the film was top notch.

Abdi was very good but I don't think his role was nearly as challenging as what Leto did for DBC, and I am not talking about the weight loss.
Well thats kind of obvious, but Leto seems a bit fem to me to begin to with so probably not as challenging as some other actors doing that role.

ETA: and it wasnt that Abdi's role was challenging, to me his screen presence was just tremendous and it didnt feel like he was "acting" at all.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top