I’m with you—Dazed and Confused is easily my favorite, and F&G is a total masterpiece. Honestly, Boyhood was just okay for me; I think the Before trilogy is where the real genius lies.
It seems like nobody stands out right now either, though maybe someone will actually become a global superstar down the road. But man, Ben Affleck in that movie? Absolute garbage. 🤣
Group of College baseball players navigating their way through the freedoms and responsibilities of unsupervised adulthood.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2937696/
The latest from Richard Linklater, the guy behind Dazed and Confused. This one takes us straight back to the 80s. Looks decent enough; coming out soon.
One of the best documentaries I’ve ever watched. That sheer will to survive—hats off to him. It was shot brilliantly, too; kept me on edge and completely hooked the entire time. One line specifically stuck with me when he was crawling with a broken leg, describing how imposing those mountains looked. Something like: "it was like somebody was just teasing an ant, putting always something in its way, and was eventually gonna stand on it." Absolutely perfect.
I actually lost it during the Boney M scene. 😬
What the hell is up with that guy waiting down below? Is he a little gay for Simon? First, he claims he'd rather Simon come back if one of them has to die, then he wants to move out immediately. He wouldn't even respond to Simpson's calls because he thought it was a ghost, wtf?🤣
If there were actually a coherent plot to go along with all that philosophical rambling, the movie might have been tolerable. Honestly, I barely made it through, and the only reason I didn't walk out was because the score and the cinematography were decent.
electricridge6 said:Thanks for the link, 🙂 But this is just some journalist's opinion and commentary; I’m looking for actual professional insight. My one real gripe with DDL is his commitment to being a method actor. Personally, I don't think you need to descend into total extremes just to play a part. To me, it feels like overkill. I usually aim for balance, so this kind of stuff just rubs me the wrong way.
As far as I'm aware, Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro are method actors.
DDL is fantastic, there’s no debate there, and it definitely holds its own against the films mentioned above. But claiming he’s already surpassed Al Pacino? I think you guys are getting a little ahead of yourselves.
Samuel Scott54 said:Daniel Day-Lewis hasn't even been filming much lately—maybe four projects in the last decade. I don't get the hype; personally, I think Leonardo DiCaprio and Edward Norton have better filmographies.
His acting is phenomenal. You only need to watch There Will Be Blood, In the Name of the Father, My Left Foot, The Last of the Mohicans, Gangs of New York, or Age of Innocence. They're all incredible movies featuring powerhouse performances. As for who has "better" films, that's debatable because everything listed here is top-tier, but we're getting ahead of ourselves... are we discussing the quality of the acting or the quality of the movies themselves?
For me, Edward Norton and Christian Bale are my favorite younger actors, but they aren't in the same league as Daniel Day-Lewis. Not yet, anyway.
People seriously don't seem to grasp that being on an A-list doesn't automatically equate to superior acting; it’s like they just can't wrap their heads around it. Let's be real: DiCaprio has movies like Inception, Shutter Island, The Departed, and The Revenant—films that qualify as A-list tier regardless of what anyone thinks—but his performance in them is mediocre at best. Nothing more. Then you look at Revolutionary Road, which perfectly illustrates just how weak DiCaprio is when he's tasked with emotional depth. He's much better suited for roles in Wolf, Django, or Catch Me If You Can. Personally, I think he struggles to carry any serious drama or anything requiring genuine emotion. The true greats could pull that off, but I simply don't see it in him.
The movie is decent enough, but I honestly expected way more based on that >. It has its moments, sure, but I was looking for more laughs and actual clever situations. Frances McDormand's scene is great, and the communists were a funny touch, but Hobie as the cowboy is easily the highlight—especially that part where he’s spinning the pasta in the restaurant. Overall, it's a 7/10.
Matthew Anderson4 said:I'll pass then. Thanks for the tip.
> looks incredible—an absolute stunner. Honestly, might even look better than >. Cinematography is my favorite part of filmmaking, so I’m hooked. Sure, there was a ton of hype, but mostly because of Leo (who wasn't anything special; Hardy totally outshined him, plus Gleeson and Poulter were just hanging around), rather than > or >. The buzz died down fast after the release, though, since most people found it way too slow and boring. It’s got its flaws, obviously, but if you actually care about movies, you’ll dig this. Catch it in a theater or wait for the Blu-ray.
How on earth can people claim 🤣 The Dark Knight Rises is actually good? The plot is riddled with holes and pure nonsense, yet somehow it’s sitting at an 8.5 on IMDb. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some hater; I thought the second film was genuinely great, but this last one is absolute garbage.
Hill and Tatum can definitely pull off a comedy. As for Clooney, he’s nothing special to me—fine, I guess—but I actually enjoy watching how Coen turns him into such a complete idiot in Burn after Reading. Most of the time, he just plays these arrogant types who constantly trip over their own egos. 😁
These trailers are absolute perfection; I am definitely catching this in theaters. The cast is incredible—I’m really banking on Fiennes and Brolin to completely steal the show.
I actually thought the movie was quite good. The script is top-tier—you can really tell the brothers know exactly what they're doing, and their signature touches are all over it 😁. Since the subject matter caught my interest, I thoroughly enjoyed it. It’s an incredibly intense watch; that sequence in Berlin was pure genius. Sure, there’s some standard Spielbergian pathos baked in, especially toward the end, but I'll take it. Honestly, I think the film should have wrapped up on the bridge, but whatever. The acting and the score were stellar. 👍
Ronald Jones said:I first saw it back in high school during music appreciation class with my entire grade. After that, I think I caught it maybe two more times... 😳 😁
Honestly, it might just be the best movie of the entire 80s. 🙏
Eric Hayes61 said:It’s not really about Eddie being the issue; the real problem lies with an audience that seems to prioritize those types of transformative roles over more "ordinary" performances. That said, I wouldn't go so far as to say Leo is doing the exact same thing
Exactly. At least he’s worked with Nolan and Tarantino. Everyone knows those guys aren't just manufacturing roles specifically to chase an Oscar.
