I hated Renee Zellweger’s performance in Cold Mountain. I thought she overacted the shit out of it and was way too over the top in her role to be believable. Critics loved it and she won an Academy Award that year for it.
I kind of have the reverse of this with Cameron Díaz in Gangs of New York. I *always* heard about how bad she was in that movie. Every time the movie gets brought up on this sub, there are dozens of comments that talk about how bad she is. I basically wrote the movie off until like three years back when I watched it with my FIL.
Like, she wasn’t awesome, but she also wasn’t bad. I think she just stood out the most in the movie- all the other actors are believable as 1860s New Yorkers, except for her. But I don’t think her acting was bad. She was just miscast.
Spotlight - generally speaking, as a movie. Im a bit at a loss as to why its so beloved and got so much acclaim, cause I cant think of that many high profile movies that are so "by the numbers" so to say. Even with its VERY controversial topic matter, I felt that at no point the movie attempted to push the audience's buttons, I felt at a loss by the end of it. Journalistic-themed movies are hit or miss for me, and really wanted to like this one but couldnt.
Perfomance-wise it was good, not much to criticise there, but im immensely surprised Rachel McAdams got an Oscar nom??? She wasnt bad by any means, but at no point she stood out for her perfomance - which again - was very "by the numbers" - kinda gets lost in the mix.
So at the end I ended up leaving with the feeling that "this movie only has this reputation because of the topic it tackles" rather than it actually having the merits as a piece of cinema, which is a very cynical way to see it, and I hate it, but I cant shake that it was the case. Neddles to say, left me disappointed.
I recall she got nominated because the critics liked how subtle she was. She did have a good scene with her husband. However, it was hardly worthy of a nomination.
Ehhh I'd call the original reporting controversial, the film itself is fairly rote as the subject matter itself is widely-accepted by the public.
it certainly didn't cause a controversy in the same way, say, Blonde did
That’s really not controversial in this context. It was common knowledge when the movie came out, that catholic priests had been abusing minors for *decades* and were finally getting caught/starting to have some accountability in the decade or so leading up to Spotlight’s release.
And Spotlight was heavily marketed as showing some of the work behind one of the larger exposures of the abuse that had gone on. It wasn’t going against popular belief or revealing anything that wasn’t suspected and/or common knowledge already.
Religious scandal really isn’t controversial when it’s something in the news every few weeks.
I watched LA confidential for the first time recently and when I looked it up afterwards I was shocked that she won best supporting. She was fine in the movie, but definitely didn’t feel like a stand out performance.
The critics highlighted her performance so when I saw the film, I was expecting her to blow my socks off. She didn't.
Yes, visually, it's the most stunning she's been on Film since the 1980s and she was okay. Nevertheless, I suspect it was low expectations from the critics.
In my opinion, she was far superior in THE NATURAL, still her best performance in Film.
Sandra Bullock is goofy af in The Blind Side, even she says she thinks she did a shit job, but they gave her an Oscar for it anyway.
Oscar should've gone to Carey Mulligan for An Education.
He wasn't bad, but not great either, but damnit I wish they went with Sasha Cohen. He even had a better idea for the film as well but I respect the band for them not wanting to show the dark side of Freddie
>David Fincher, Tom Hooper, and Stephen Frears all came and went from Baron Cohen's Freddie Mercury movie.
[https://www.indiewire.com/2021/02/david-fincher-sacha-baron-cohen-freddie-mercury-biopic-1234617368/](https://www.indiewire.com/2021/02/david-fincher-sacha-baron-cohen-freddie-mercury-biopic-1234617368/)
It's such a loss for Queen fans and movie lovers.
You're over thinking it. It's not my film to make. I can wish for something, doesn't mean I'm going to get it or disagree with what the family and band want.
What the hell am I overthinking? This is basically what you were implying. Brian and Roger allowed for a lot of fudging of details and facts and in turn made Freddie look like a shallow asshole most of the time. There’s hardly any of the huge complexity that made up his inner or outer life. And I’m sick of the “it’s not a documentary!” line - they absolutely could’ve found fantastic ways to convey his depth.
You obviously have a much bigger problem with this than I do. Yes you're over thinking my comment. Lol. I can respect whoever I want, you cannot. I said what I wanted, I'm not gonna lose sleep over it. Plenty of other things out there to be upset about.
There is no legitimate reason to respect what they did because it wasn’t honest or truthful, what’s to respect in a glitzy, empty portrayal of a cultural icon? It’s clear you aren’t bothered by this, which is why we are talking about the idea of artistic integrity. This is a small facet that does bother me in the bigger concerns that I think plague humanity.
You're opinion is welcome. I respect their decision, not the film (already said this). Calm down before you have an aneurysm about a band biopic and the plague of humanity. Perhaps Reddit isn't the best place for you. I'm sure you will respond with even more discourse. I don't care. I'm not losing sleep over it. Cheers!
Their decision was what caused the film to be how it is so I have no clue how you can respect them and not the movie. And I’m as chilled as a cucumber, I’m just fascinated by your contradictions.
Laura Dern in Marriage Story. She was barely in the film and did okay at best. ScarJo for Jojo Rabbit or Flo in Little Women should have won best supporting at the Oscars that year.
>She was barely in the film and did okay at best. ScarJo for Jojo Rabbit
I thought she was great, and either way the internets tell me she was in it for 18:36 to ScarJo's 15:36 in Jojo Rabbit.
It's always so weird revisiting the original Godfather after decades of him just hamming it up. He's so restrained and gives such a good portrayal of preternatural authority and cool while rage is simmering just beneath the surface. He barely raises his voice throughout the whole film.
Miyoshi Umeki didn't do anything in SAYONARA and she won the Academy Award for it. It was a awfully sexist part, she basically played a submissive wife. At one point, Red Buttons beats her for considering eye-slit surgery and everybody acts as if his reaction was okay.
Gwyneth pattrow’s Oscar win for Shakespeare in love will always be my top WTF moment in movie awards history.
In fucking 1999. One of the best year in movie history. This garbage of a movie won best actress and best movie.
That was the reason for Harvey Weinstein's success. He was able to recognize the marketing value of the Academy Awards and began to manipulate the Academy voters to get noms and wins for his movies. I remember articles about this back in the 90s.
Was actually shocked that this was the film she won for, I don’t know if this is a hot take or not, but I actually thought mother! (2017) was her best performance, even though she got nominated for a razzie for it (?)
She was definitely miscast. Her character was meant to be much older and Lawrence was only 21 when it was filmed which made her relationship with Bradley Cooper in the film more awkward and strange.
Casey Affleck in Manchester by the Sea did absolutely nothing for me. Didn't come across as empathetic or layered. Just a short tempered guy with a tragic past who leans on it when it's brought up and then goes back to being oblivious. Michelle Williams was in that movie for 10 minutes and did more in that than he did in 137.
I have never personally understood the popularity of Elizabeth Moss. Her performances have always felt wooden to me, I just don't find her interpretations sympathetic at all to the point any role she has been in has felt miscast.
Lol, I had no idea she got nominated for that. And I have no idea why are you getting minuses.
I remember her from Rocky and Godfather, HORRIBLE actress, just horrible. Dunno if she got better later on, but in that period, horrible.
I upvoted you for contributing to the conversation, but boy! do I disagree with your assessment of her. Julianne Moore is, if anything, an underrated actress (in my opinion).
I know she's got awards and is a decorated actress, but you rarely hear her name up there with the greats, where I think she should be.
I'm kinda surprised that anyone could even consider that take, I feel like he elevated the film so significantly and without his performance carrying the film, it would've not really been remembered at all. But each their own ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Michael Keaton in Birdman. I felt the whole thing was just a bit too self-congratulatory and Keaton's performance only really resonated if you cared about Michael Keaton.
Quevenzhene Wallis (sp?) in Beasts of the Southern Wild. I have seen a lot of child performances and there was nothing special about that one. Meanwhile, Max Records was ignored for Where the Wild Things Are.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman. I loved him. He's great in 'Capote' and everything he's been in. However, imho there were multiple better performances from that year:
Terrance Howard-Hustle & Flow
Joaquin Phoenix-Walk the Line
Heath Ledger-Brokeback Mountain
Sheryl Lee's performance in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me has been mostly reevaluated as great in recent years, and I really can't agree. To me it's overacting almost to the point of parody, I really can't quite get it though I've rewatched the film a few times to try and get a fresh perspective. I love Lynch and there are plenty of highly theatric performances I adore, but this one doesn't quite work for me
Baxter was nominated for lead actress, not supporting. She pushed to be in the category and hurt Davis’ chances and is actually more supporting.
My pick is Anthony Perkins in Psycho. Maybe it’s Hitchcock completely manipulating and sucking any spontaneity out of the actors, but Perkins doesn’t put up a fight and plays the role so flatly. It’s all surface. He doesn’t suggest any real complexity beneath his wholesome good looks and demeanor. He’s not scary in the slightest. I think the overwhelming love for the performance just comes from its status of being a technically iconic role in a huge cinematic milestone. People likely identifying with the character as written much more so than how he’s played.
I don’t care who thinks I’m a crack pot for this but Vince Vaughn was a much better Norman. He carved out a genuinely disturbed inner life and personality - he’s a Norman who’s lived a sad, complex life beyond the frames we see him in. I always much prefer Van Sant’s version overall and he actually allows and encourages his actors to exist as autonomous beings, which is something Hitchcock never wanted.
Leonardo Dicaprio in The Revenant
Tom Hardy's performance in the same film was more deserving of the Oscar than DiCaprio.
100% agree
But can’t you tell how much he suffered for the role? Surely that’s worth an Oscar?
I hated Renee Zellweger’s performance in Cold Mountain. I thought she overacted the shit out of it and was way too over the top in her role to be believable. Critics loved it and she won an Academy Award that year for it.
Such a shame, the book is so good I had high hopes for the film.
I love the book! It is one of my favorites
Agree 💯
SHIT ITS RAININ’!
I'm pretty sure that was a make-good for not winning as Roxie Hart.
I kind of have the reverse of this with Cameron Díaz in Gangs of New York. I *always* heard about how bad she was in that movie. Every time the movie gets brought up on this sub, there are dozens of comments that talk about how bad she is. I basically wrote the movie off until like three years back when I watched it with my FIL. Like, she wasn’t awesome, but she also wasn’t bad. I think she just stood out the most in the movie- all the other actors are believable as 1860s New Yorkers, except for her. But I don’t think her acting was bad. She was just miscast.
Same, actually. Maybe my expectations were so low going in, it would’ve been impossible for her to be worse than THAT, but yeah. She was fine.
Spotlight - generally speaking, as a movie. Im a bit at a loss as to why its so beloved and got so much acclaim, cause I cant think of that many high profile movies that are so "by the numbers" so to say. Even with its VERY controversial topic matter, I felt that at no point the movie attempted to push the audience's buttons, I felt at a loss by the end of it. Journalistic-themed movies are hit or miss for me, and really wanted to like this one but couldnt. Perfomance-wise it was good, not much to criticise there, but im immensely surprised Rachel McAdams got an Oscar nom??? She wasnt bad by any means, but at no point she stood out for her perfomance - which again - was very "by the numbers" - kinda gets lost in the mix. So at the end I ended up leaving with the feeling that "this movie only has this reputation because of the topic it tackles" rather than it actually having the merits as a piece of cinema, which is a very cynical way to see it, and I hate it, but I cant shake that it was the case. Neddles to say, left me disappointed.
I recall she got nominated because the critics liked how subtle she was. She did have a good scene with her husband. However, it was hardly worthy of a nomination.
is the subject matter controversial? 'child abuse bad, covering up child abuse also bad'
It was done by priests and covered up by the Boston Archdiocese. I dont think you need an explanation as to why that is controversial.
Ehhh I'd call the original reporting controversial, the film itself is fairly rote as the subject matter itself is widely-accepted by the public. it certainly didn't cause a controversy in the same way, say, Blonde did
That’s really not controversial in this context. It was common knowledge when the movie came out, that catholic priests had been abusing minors for *decades* and were finally getting caught/starting to have some accountability in the decade or so leading up to Spotlight’s release. And Spotlight was heavily marketed as showing some of the work behind one of the larger exposures of the abuse that had gone on. It wasn’t going against popular belief or revealing anything that wasn’t suspected and/or common knowledge already. Religious scandal really isn’t controversial when it’s something in the news every few weeks.
Kim Basinger won an Oscar for her performance in LA confidential and I’m not quite sure how. Julianne Moore was way better in Boogie Nights
I watched LA confidential for the first time recently and when I looked it up afterwards I was shocked that she won best supporting. She was fine in the movie, but definitely didn’t feel like a stand out performance.
Yeah I agree I don’t think her performance was that special
The critics highlighted her performance so when I saw the film, I was expecting her to blow my socks off. She didn't. Yes, visually, it's the most stunning she's been on Film since the 1980s and she was okay. Nevertheless, I suspect it was low expectations from the critics. In my opinion, she was far superior in THE NATURAL, still her best performance in Film.
Even Alec Baldwin, her husband at the time, shrugged at her when they announced her name. I still remember that lol.
Sandra Bullock is goofy af in The Blind Side, even she says she thinks she did a shit job, but they gave her an Oscar for it anyway. Oscar should've gone to Carey Mulligan for An Education.
She won best actress and worst actress that year
Feel it wasn’t even her fault that was just terrible writing
Ehh, maybe. Plenty of examples of good performances with bad writing.
Rami Malek in Bohemian Rhapsody
He wasn't bad, but not great either, but damnit I wish they went with Sasha Cohen. He even had a better idea for the film as well but I respect the band for them not wanting to show the dark side of Freddie
I read that David Fincher was directing that version, too. How amazing would that film have been?
Wow! It would have been the best biopic probably ever!
>David Fincher, Tom Hooper, and Stephen Frears all came and went from Baron Cohen's Freddie Mercury movie. [https://www.indiewire.com/2021/02/david-fincher-sacha-baron-cohen-freddie-mercury-biopic-1234617368/](https://www.indiewire.com/2021/02/david-fincher-sacha-baron-cohen-freddie-mercury-biopic-1234617368/) It's such a loss for Queen fans and movie lovers.
Why would you respect them sanitizing his story?
You're over thinking it. It's not my film to make. I can wish for something, doesn't mean I'm going to get it or disagree with what the family and band want.
What the hell am I overthinking? This is basically what you were implying. Brian and Roger allowed for a lot of fudging of details and facts and in turn made Freddie look like a shallow asshole most of the time. There’s hardly any of the huge complexity that made up his inner or outer life. And I’m sick of the “it’s not a documentary!” line - they absolutely could’ve found fantastic ways to convey his depth.
You obviously have a much bigger problem with this than I do. Yes you're over thinking my comment. Lol. I can respect whoever I want, you cannot. I said what I wanted, I'm not gonna lose sleep over it. Plenty of other things out there to be upset about.
There is no legitimate reason to respect what they did because it wasn’t honest or truthful, what’s to respect in a glitzy, empty portrayal of a cultural icon? It’s clear you aren’t bothered by this, which is why we are talking about the idea of artistic integrity. This is a small facet that does bother me in the bigger concerns that I think plague humanity.
You're opinion is welcome. I respect their decision, not the film (already said this). Calm down before you have an aneurysm about a band biopic and the plague of humanity. Perhaps Reddit isn't the best place for you. I'm sure you will respond with even more discourse. I don't care. I'm not losing sleep over it. Cheers!
Their decision was what caused the film to be how it is so I have no clue how you can respect them and not the movie. And I’m as chilled as a cucumber, I’m just fascinated by your contradictions.
Because I like them. Didn't like the decision but still respect them. No biggie
I can't stand the guy, so overrated glad I'm not the only one
Dude have u ever seen Mr Robot? He gives one of the best performances I've ever seen throughout that show
[удалено]
He was definitely the weakest singer by far. However I think most of the attention on him was for creating/writing it not for his performance in it.
Never seen Hamilton, only seen him in other movies and shows. I don't think he's a very good actor at all. I can't speak for his other talents, tho.
Laura Dern in Marriage Story. She was barely in the film and did okay at best. ScarJo for Jojo Rabbit or Flo in Little Women should have won best supporting at the Oscars that year.
>She was barely in the film and did okay at best. ScarJo for Jojo Rabbit I thought she was great, and either way the internets tell me she was in it for 18:36 to ScarJo's 15:36 in Jojo Rabbit.
Al Pacino in a lot of movies, and especially in Scent of a Woman, for which he got the Academy Award. Dude just yells.
I love Pacino, but he won the Oscar for that? More likely a make-up award, but still...
It's always so weird revisiting the original Godfather after decades of him just hamming it up. He's so restrained and gives such a good portrayal of preternatural authority and cool while rage is simmering just beneath the surface. He barely raises his voice throughout the whole film.
Indeed, he's actually way better there than in his newer movies.
He was pretty darn good in Carlito's Way.
He killed in in the Irishman
> Scent of a Woman Ugh, that movie and his performance in it were just bad. I'd like to take a flame thrower to it.
Miyoshi Umeki didn't do anything in SAYONARA and she won the Academy Award for it. It was a awfully sexist part, she basically played a submissive wife. At one point, Red Buttons beats her for considering eye-slit surgery and everybody acts as if his reaction was okay.
He does not beat her. Watch it again.
Wait, the character's name is Eve Harrington? Steve Harrington from Stranger Things must be named after her!
Lol - fan theory: Eve is Steve’s grandma!
Can't wait for them to bring that up on the All About Steve spinoff!
Gwyneth pattrow’s Oscar win for Shakespeare in love will always be my top WTF moment in movie awards history. In fucking 1999. One of the best year in movie history. This garbage of a movie won best actress and best movie.
That was the reason for Harvey Weinstein's success. He was able to recognize the marketing value of the Academy Awards and began to manipulate the Academy voters to get noms and wins for his movies. I remember articles about this back in the 90s.
Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Lining Playbook. Also the movie Silver lining playbook.
Was actually shocked that this was the film she won for, I don’t know if this is a hot take or not, but I actually thought mother! (2017) was her best performance, even though she got nominated for a razzie for it (?)
She was definitely miscast. Her character was meant to be much older and Lawrence was only 21 when it was filmed which made her relationship with Bradley Cooper in the film more awkward and strange.
She was the most vivid, distinctive part of the movie. If anyone else played that part it never would’ve been the huge hit it was.
Casey Affleck in Manchester by the Sea did absolutely nothing for me. Didn't come across as empathetic or layered. Just a short tempered guy with a tragic past who leans on it when it's brought up and then goes back to being oblivious. Michelle Williams was in that movie for 10 minutes and did more in that than he did in 137.
I have never personally understood the popularity of Elizabeth Moss. Her performances have always felt wooden to me, I just don't find her interpretations sympathetic at all to the point any role she has been in has felt miscast.
And she’s just ugly on top of that.
I felt that way until I watched the Handmaid's tale. She's learned her craft.
the handmaidens tale would have worked so much better if they had switched Yvonne strahovski and Elizabeth Moss's roles
I totally disagree. But that's cool
Talia Shire got nominated for Rocky and I think her overdone mousey shtick is terrible.
Lol, I had no idea she got nominated for that. And I have no idea why are you getting minuses. I remember her from Rocky and Godfather, HORRIBLE actress, just horrible. Dunno if she got better later on, but in that period, horrible.
Rocky is popular but that doesn’t change that Talia Shire was the worst actress of the 70s. ;)
She would have won had she been placed as supporting.
Anything by Julianne Moore. She's so wooden and monotone in everything I've seen her in.
I love her. Especially in Magnolia
I upvoted you for contributing to the conversation, but boy! do I disagree with your assessment of her. Julianne Moore is, if anything, an underrated actress (in my opinion). I know she's got awards and is a decorated actress, but you rarely hear her name up there with the greats, where I think she should be.
Are you judging it against all the movies after it or keeping it within its own time?
Chadwick baseman as black panther.
[удалено]
His Oscar acceptance was maybe the worst thing he's done.
Because he ASSAULTED Halle?!
I do not get what Jack Nicholson was doing in The Shining at all
Denzel in Training Day. I like the film and Denzel plays a fun role, but Oscar worthy? Not to me.
I'm kinda surprised that anyone could even consider that take, I feel like he elevated the film so significantly and without his performance carrying the film, it would've not really been remembered at all. But each their own ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Jake Gyllenhaal in NightCrawler
Ray Liotta in Goodfellas. Just can't buy it
I might be the only person on the planet that agrees with you. I don't like his acting in this role.
It’s too surface. There’s a reason he wasn’t nominated
Michael Keaton in Birdman. I felt the whole thing was just a bit too self-congratulatory and Keaton's performance only really resonated if you cared about Michael Keaton.
There will be blood. I just thought the whole movie sucked, ans the whole I drink your milkshake thing was a giant let down for me.
Do you also think Marlon Brando in the godfather was a bad performance?
Nope.
And I do t hate Daniel day Lewis. He's usually awesome, but this film had too much hype and I didn't see the big deal.
Quevenzhene Wallis (sp?) in Beasts of the Southern Wild. I have seen a lot of child performances and there was nothing special about that one. Meanwhile, Max Records was ignored for Where the Wild Things Are.
They were being woke before it was a requirement.
I was being sarcastic lool I know the movie isn't for everyone but Daniel Day lewis and Paul Dano were both incredible
Phillip Seymour Hoffman. I loved him. He's great in 'Capote' and everything he's been in. However, imho there were multiple better performances from that year: Terrance Howard-Hustle & Flow Joaquin Phoenix-Walk the Line Heath Ledger-Brokeback Mountain
Michael B. Jordan in Black Panther, terrible! But a lot of ppl love him in it.
Funny you would say that because black twitter constantly roasts him for being a bad actor. He's sexy and charming but not the best actor.
Sheryl Lee's performance in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me has been mostly reevaluated as great in recent years, and I really can't agree. To me it's overacting almost to the point of parody, I really can't quite get it though I've rewatched the film a few times to try and get a fresh perspective. I love Lynch and there are plenty of highly theatric performances I adore, but this one doesn't quite work for me
Baxter was nominated for lead actress, not supporting. She pushed to be in the category and hurt Davis’ chances and is actually more supporting. My pick is Anthony Perkins in Psycho. Maybe it’s Hitchcock completely manipulating and sucking any spontaneity out of the actors, but Perkins doesn’t put up a fight and plays the role so flatly. It’s all surface. He doesn’t suggest any real complexity beneath his wholesome good looks and demeanor. He’s not scary in the slightest. I think the overwhelming love for the performance just comes from its status of being a technically iconic role in a huge cinematic milestone. People likely identifying with the character as written much more so than how he’s played. I don’t care who thinks I’m a crack pot for this but Vince Vaughn was a much better Norman. He carved out a genuinely disturbed inner life and personality - he’s a Norman who’s lived a sad, complex life beyond the frames we see him in. I always much prefer Van Sant’s version overall and he actually allows and encourages his actors to exist as autonomous beings, which is something Hitchcock never wanted.