Unpopular Opinions

[OakGoblinFly]

So, Gravity was on HBO this weekend and as I'm watching it I couldn't help but wonder what the fuss was about.  Sure it was a pretty film to look at and that's about it.  I thought it was dull, uninspired, the performances were mediocre at best, and I found myself not caring whether or not Sandra Bullock made it back to earth or not.  This movie was a pure Oscar bait project and I loathe everything about it. 

[wlk68]

So, Gravity was on HBO this weekend and as I'm watching it I couldn't help but wonder what the fuss was about.  Sure it was a pretty film to look at and that's about it.  I thought it was dull, uninspired, the performances were mediocre at best, and I found myself not caring whether or not Sandra Bullock made it back to earth or not.  This movie was a pure Oscar bait project and I loathe everything about it. 

I haven't seen it and have no real desire to. That being said, I work for an engineering company and you should have heard my co-workers pick this movie apart. They were brutal.

[CaughtOnTape]

So, Gravity was on HBO this weekend and as I'm watching it I couldn't help but wonder what the fuss was about.  Sure it was a pretty film to look at and that's about it.  I thought it was dull, uninspired, the performances were mediocre at best, and I found myself not caring whether or not Sandra Bullock made it back to earth or not.  This movie was a pure Oscar bait project and I loathe everything about it. 

 

I could not agree more.  My dad and I left the theater all disappointed.  It really was a terrible story and so predictable and boring.  

I guess it had something to do with how it was shot....but for people who aren't camera angle buffs, it was just your basic movie about someone overcoming tragedy.  Really was not that Oscar worthy at all.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Well, I was bored this weekend and finally saw HollywoodLand. What an utter snoozefest. Not to mention that again, my opinion of not liking Ben Affleck and thinking he's not a good actor was cemented (this is my unpopular opinion based on my friends blasting me and telling me to give him a chance.)

 

First of all, I remember watching The Adventures of Superman with George Reeves, and he did NOT look as chunky as Ben did to look like him. I think I read how Affleck put on some pounds to look like him or something.  And the voice affecctations to sound like him, I'm assuming? Just turned me off.

 

That said, the whole movie as just crap. The only thing I liked about it, if there was anything to like, was it left me wondering did Reeves really commit suicide and will we ever know? Or, will it be one of life's unsolved mysteries?

 

And I STILL maintain my opinion that he's a LOUSY choice to play Batman. And this, I know is truly an unpopular opinion.

[ramble]

And I STILL maintain my opinion that he's a LOUSY choice to play Batman. And this, I know is truly an unpopular opinion.

It's unpopular? I thought there was a large outcry when he was announced for the role. I agree with you on the lousy choice & I'll add the idea of him playing Batman makes me slightly nauseated.

[GHScorpiosRule]

It's unpopular? I thought there was a large outcry when he was announced for the role. I agree with you on the lousy choice & I'll add the idea of him playing Batman makes me slightly nauseated.

 

Yeah. People keep telling me to give him a chance because we haven't seen him as Bats yet, and they keep throwing Heath Ledger's Joker and the response to his being cast as an example. EXCEPT, I was never one who thought Ledger was a WTF choice. I thought it was interesting. Plus, Ledger could actually, you know, act as far as I'm concerned. And I'm not a fangurl by any means. I didn't grow up reading the comics. My opinion is based on from watching who has played Bats, voiced Bats since Batman: The animated Series, to Bale (and yeah, my loving his Bruce and Bats (the awful voice notwithstanding) is the unpopular opinion here and on the defunct TWoP.

[ruby24]

Yeah, I agree, that whole thing about people saying the same thing about Heath Ledger- I really don't think they were. It wasn't that kind of reaction, it was more like, huh, that's weird, I wonder how that will work. But he had already been nominated for Brokeback Mountain and everything, people knew he could act.

 

This is more like the George Clooney Batman casting, which people thought was terrible and were RIGHT about. Everyone knows Ben Affleck as an actor. He's limited, he has no real range.

 

My favorite is still Michael Keaton.

Edited July 14, 2014 by ruby24

[Julia]

I've just read that Jason Momoa (Ronon Dex from Stargate Atlantis and Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones) is going to be Aqua Man in that movie. I don't know how Ben Affleck (who I actually kind of like from Good Will Hunting) is going to look like a superhero on the same screen.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Julia

[Francesca007]

It's unpopular? I thought there was a large outcry when he was announced for the role. I agree with you on the lousy choice & I'll add the idea of him playing Batman makes me slightly nauseated.

Here Here! He's going to ruin it for good.

Fell asleep watching Gravity this weekend. Zzzzz. No idea what the hype is about.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Francesca007

[benteen]

So, Gravity was on HBO this weekend and as I'm watching it I couldn't help but wonder what the fuss was about.  Sure it was a pretty film to look at and that's about it.  I thought it was dull, uninspired, the performances were mediocre at best, and I found myself not caring whether or not Sandra Bullock made it back to earth or not.  This movie was a pure Oscar bait project and I loathe everything about it. 

 

Gravity was visually brilliant but nothing special storywise.  Sandra Bullock's character was annoying and while George Clooney was fun, he was George Clooney playing an astronaut. 

 

I think Louie CK said it best about the Bullock character.  If you're a "reluctant astronaut" you should NOT be allowed to go into space.

 

Avatar was also a great visual experience but had a nothing special plot with a bunch of clichés in it.

[Joe]

 

Avatar was also a great visual experience but had a nothing special plot with a bunch of clichés in it.

That's not a UO, as far as I can tell. Actually liking the plot would be a UO. :) But you're absolutely right, of course.

[ribboninthesky1]

Gravity was visually brilliant but nothing special storywise.  Sandra Bullock's character was annoying and while George Clooney was fun, he was George Clooney playing an astronaut. 

 

I think Louie CK said it best about the Bullock character.  If you're a "reluctant astronaut" you should NOT be allowed to go into space.

 

I saw it in IMAX 3D, and in that regard, it was worth the experience. 

 

I like Sandra Bullock, and can objectively appreciate that a female-driven movie did so well at the box office and wasn't a romantic comedy or drama, but I never understood the buzz around her performance.  I particularly hated

that her will to live or temporary lack thereof was tied up in the death of her child. To me, self-preservation and the will to survive is enough. No need for the extraneous angst.

 

Agreed on the reluctant astronaut aspect.

[dougfir]

With all due respect to the late John Hughes, Better Off Dead is the best teen movie of the '80s (saw Breakfast Club as a teen back in the day, and I liked it but didn't **love** it... frankly, it left me a little cold for some reason).

[roamyn]

With all due respect to the late John Hughes, Better Off Dead is the best teen movie of the '80s (saw Breakfast Club as a teen back in the day, and I liked it but didn't **love** it... frankly, it left me a little cold for some reason).

Here I have to respectfully disagree w/you.

Fast Times at Ridgemont High is THE ultimate teen/young adult movie from the 80's.

[Danny Franks]

I've just read that Jason Momoa (Ronon Dex from Stargate Atlantis and Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones) is going to be Aqua Man in that movie. I don't know how Ben Affleck (who I actually kind of like from Good Will Hunting) is going to look like a superhero on the same screen.

 

Well, Batman isn't a superhero. He has no superpowers. So I think he'll look like Batman should look. Like a normal man who has trained his body to the peak of physical fitness. Aquaman and Superman are not humans, so I don't see any reason for them to not be more physically imposing than Batman (as they would be if not for the comic book artists' obsession with drawing huge, impossibly bulging muscles on every one of their characters). And I'm not sure why this should be an issue when you look at the people who have played Batman before. None of them have been particularly big or muscular.

 

Also in Ben Affleck's favour is that, compared to the acting of Henry Cavill and Jason Momoa, he's going to look like Robert De Niro in his prime.  Momoa is decent when he looks angry and violent, and that's about it. And Cavill is decent when... well, I've yet to see him be any good at all.

[OakGoblinFly]

I've just read that Jason Momoa (Ronon Dex from Stargate Atlantis and Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones) is going to be Aqua Man in that movie. I don't know how Ben Affleck (who I actually kind of like from Good Will Hunting) is going to look like a superhero on the same screen.

 

 

Bleck.  I am not a fan of Jason Momoa (I don't think he can act and his looks do nothing for me) and I, much like Raj, think Aqua-Man sucks.

Gravity was visually brilliant but nothing special storywise.  Sandra Bullock's character was annoying and while George Clooney was fun, he was George Clooney playing an astronaut. 

 

 

It's interesting you say that about George Clooney because whenever he pops up I think "oh, it's Clooney" and never the character he plays.  His "stardom" is such that I never see the character, just the actor and that detracts from the movie.

Also in Ben Affleck's favour is that, compared to the acting of Henry Cavill and Jason Momoa, he's going to look like Robert De Niro in his prime.  Momoa is decent when he looks angry and violent, and that's about it. And Cavill is decent when... well, I've yet to see him be any good at all.

 

 

I like Ben Affleck as an actor, I think he's very good.  Cavill was rather decent in The Tudors.  I truly think it depends on the material.  I felt he was saddled with a horrific script in Man of Steel.  I rather liked the joyfulness he brought to the role; it's too bad the powers-that-be wanted to go dark because that is not Cavill's strength.  I think he's most effective when he's allowed to be charming and joyful (honestly, I think he's good rom-com material).

 

Momoa on the other hand, I don't think he can act is way out of a paper bag.  He's fine as long as he's cast in a role where he all he does is stand around and look intimating. 

[GreekGeek]

(saw Breakfast Club as a teen back in the day, and I liked it but didn't **love** it... frankly, it left me a little cold for some reason).

 

Maybe because all the characters except Ally Sheedy's are stereotypes--jock, nerd, cheerleader, bully.

 

Also, I thought there was something ridiculously contrived about the whole situation--who summons kids to an all day Saturday detention and then leaves them without supervision, so that they can all proceed to bare their souls?

 

I was already too old for teen movies in the 80's (sob), so I can't judge which was the best.

[Crs97]

Charlie Rose interviewed George Clooney, and he talked about his acting. He said there are two kinds of actors: people who get lost in their role so you can't tell actor from character and Spencer Tracy types who essentially play variations of the same character each time. He labeled himself as the Spencer Tracy type, saying, "you know what you're gonna get with me. My acting range is small but I am good within that box." I thought he had good self-awareness on this front.

Cannot stand Breakfast Club. I was smack dab in my teens when it came out, but still thought they were all a bunch of whiners blaming their bad behavior on their parents. I was disgusted by the end.

[Pickles Aplenty]

 

Cannot stand Breakfast Club. I was smack dab in my teens when it came out, but still thought they were all a bunch of whiners blaming their bad behavior on their parents. I was disgusted by the end.

I still like The Breakfast Club, but now the deep, confessional scenes just make me laugh.  Recalling how you taped someone's asscheeks together is OMG, SO EMOTIONAL.

 

Unpopular Clooney opinion:  The only time I found him attractive was in From Dusk Till Dawn.  Other than that, he's looked like an old man to me. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

Glad other people dislike The Breakfast Club. I hated every last one of those self-absorbed, mealy-mouthed, navel-gazing whiners; yes, even Ally Sheedy. 

 

I prefer the original, 1950 Father of the Bride over the better-known 1991 version. Spencer Tracy will always, always, always have it over Steve Martin, IMO.

 

Not only do I prefer Tangled over Frozen, but Tangled was also my favorite animated movie of 2010. Sorry, Toy Story 3.

 

I'm a feminist, but The Women (the 1939 one, not the 2008 remake) doesn't bother me. In spite of Lucille Watson's questionable advice ("Don't confide in your girlfriends!"), I don't think it paints all friendships between women as inherently bad.  Mary dumped one mean friend (Sylvia), but held on to her nicer pals, which is what you should do. Yeah, I'm not crazy about how she goes back to her lousy husband at the end, but what movie is perfect, right?

[ribboninthesky1]

Charlie Rose interviewed George Clooney, and he talked about his acting. He said there are two kinds of actors: people who get lost in their role so you can't tell actor from character and Spencer Tracy types who essentially play variations of the same character each time. He labeled himself as the Spencer Tracy type, saying, "you know what you're gonna get with me. My acting range is small but I am good within that box." I thought he had good self-awareness on this front.

 

To me, the latter describes most decent actors and actresses, and that's okay.  I feel like you have to be some combination of exceptionally talented, disturbed, and/or eccentric to become a completely different person every few months and make it work.   

[ruby24]

Yeah, I love The Women, but the ultimate message in the end seemed to be that all men are inherently weak, so cheating isn't really his fault, and you can't just give up your husband to another woman- no, you must fight that woman for him. Weird.

[Danny Franks]

To me, the latter describes most decent actors and actresses, and that's okay.  I feel like you have to be some combination of exceptionally talented, disturbed, and/or eccentric to become a completely different person every few months and make it work.   

 

I think it's also how you'd describe a quintessential movie star (like Spencer Tracy, Cary Grant and James Stewart). I mean, the sort of star that brings people to the cinema, that makes a movie a success off the power of their appeal. Because, for someone like Clooney, people see the movie because they know they're going to get George Clooney, not some chameleon who gets completely lost in the role he's playing.

 

So yeah. I agree that there's no problem with an actor having limited range, as long as the range they do have is something they do very well. Yes, George Clooney is always George Clooney, but I like George Clooney, so I'm fine with it.

 

Same goes for Brad Pitt and others. Emma Stone, from what I've seen, is a performer in this vein too. She's always going to have the same, slightly nerdy charm and girl-next-door sex appeal, and I'm fine with that. Because her personality draws me to want to watch a movie.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Danny Franks

[Athena]

To me, the latter describes most decent actors and actresses, and that's okay.  I feel like you have to be some combination of exceptionally talented, disturbed, and/or eccentric to become a completely different person every few months and make it work.   

 

Yes and the second category is rather small and very subjective. Off the top of my head, I'd say Meryl Streep and Cate Blantchett are total chameleon actors who disappears into their roles. Lots of character actors would fall in the second category too, but that in itself is a sort of box.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Yes and the second category is rather small and very subjective. Off the top of my head, I'd say Meryl Streep and Cate Blantchett are total chameleon actors who disappears into their roles. Lots of character actors would fall in the second category too, but that in itself is a sort of box.

 

I would add Daniel Day-Lewis to this group. He always, without fail, becomes the character he is playing and I don't consider or think of him as eccentric or disturbed. Just crazy ass talented and a genius at his craft.  Until I saw an interview with him in the special features in one of his movies, I didn't even know what his actual voice sounded like. It's different for each character he has ever played.

Edited July 15, 2014 by GHScorpiosRule

[Shannon L.]

 

I would add Daniel Day-Lewis to this group. He always, without fail, becomes the character he is playing and I don't consider or think of him as eccentric or disturbed.

I think that method artists qualify as a bit eccentric.  God bless the men and women who can live with them, because I don't think I could.  Gary Oldman does this, too.  I don't remember a lot of Val Kilmer movies, but I seem to remember him doing a good job at disappearing, too.  I thought he was great in The Doors.

 

I loved The Breakfast Club as a kid, but now I just feel kind of "meh" about it.  The nostalgia is strong, so it makes me smile, but if I'd been older at the time, I don't think I'd have liked it as much.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Shannon L.

[ribboninthesky1]

Yes and the second category is rather small and very subjective. Off the top of my head, I'd say Meryl Streep and Cate Blantchett are total chameleon actors who disappears into their roles. Lots of character actors would fall in the second category too, but that in itself is a sort of box.

 

I'd argue that the former is subjective as well. There are celebrated actors and actresses, in both categories, I've never been impressed with, and there are some I've always liked on screen.  Different tastes, based on what you like to see in movies.

 

I worked for a major studio for a couple years, and I think it really shifted my perspective on actors and actresses as people.  I used to perceive limited/specific range as a bad thing, but I've come to believe that acting is just like any other profession, where most people are competent and have specific strengths, and the small set of outliers in the "how did you ever make it pass auditions?" or "disappear into every role" groups.  

 

I think that method artists qualify as a bit eccentric.  God bless the men and women who can live with them, because I don't think I could.

 

Agreed, though it could apply to those who aren't and are just caught up in the culture of celebrity.  I feel like the very thing that makes them exceptional in their profession would be quite the challenge to live with in the mundane. But there are people who manage it, and quite well, so more power to them. 

[midge]

Are these UO? 

 

- I hate every single thing Quentin Tarantino has ever done.   HATE.

- Ferris Bueller's Day Off is incredibly irritating. Brats.  I always root for the sister to  go crazy and just run him over with her Fiero.   It's not a good thing when the best part of your movie is Charlie Sheen. 

[Snowprince]

I think it's also how you'd describe a quintessential movie star (like Spencer Tracy, Cary Grant and James Stewart). I mean, the sort of star that brings people to the cinema, that makes a movie a success off the power of their appeal. Because, for someone like Clooney, people see the movie because they know they're going to get George Clooney, not some chameleon who gets completely lost in the role he's playing.

 

So yeah. I agree that there's no problem with an actor having limited range, as long as the range they do have is something they do very well. Yes, George Clooney is always George Clooney, but I like George Clooney, so I'm fine with it.

 

Same goes for Brad Pitt and others. Emma Stone, from what I've seen, is a performer in this vein too. She's always going to have the same, slightly nerdy charm and girl-next-door sex appeal, and I'm fine with that. Because her personality draws me to want to watch a movie.

       

        This is how I'd address the (to me) ultimate actor of this type, John Wayne. No matter the character or genre, it was always JOHN WAYNE you saw on the screen. I also thought he was a better actor than many gave him credit for. 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Snowprince

[Lazlo]

I think Julianne Moore, though absurdly beautiful and likable on screen (and apparently an unaging vampiress) has a very limited range.

[benteen]

Glad other people dislike The Breakfast Club. I hated every last one of those self-absorbed, mealy-mouthed, navel-gazing whiners; yes, even Ally Sheedy. 

 

I prefer the original, 1950 Father of the Bride over the better-known 1991 version. Spencer Tracy will always, always, always have it over Steve Martin, IMO.

 

Not only do I prefer Tangled over Frozen, but Tangled was also my favorite animated movie of 2010. Sorry, Toy Story 3.

 

I'm a feminist, but The Women (the 1939 one, not the 2008 remake) doesn't bother me. In spite of Lucille Watson's questionable advice ("Don't confide in your girlfriends!"), I don't think it paints all friendships between women as inherently bad.  Mary dumped one mean friend (Sylvia), but held on to her nicer pals, which is what you should do. Yeah, I'm not crazy about how she goes back to her lousy husband at the end, but what movie is perfect, right?

 

The Breakfast Club is still a favorite of mine but I think your description is perfect for St. Elmo's Fire.

 

Every film Judd Apatow has done doesn't hold a candle to his work on Freaks and Geeks.  I don't know if that's an unpopular opinion.

[roamyn]

Are these UO?

- I hate every single thing Quentin Tarantino has ever done. HATE.

- Ferris Bueller's Day Off is incredibly irritating. Brats. I always root for the sister to go crazy and just run him over with her Fiero. It's not a good thing when the best part of your movie is Charlie Sheen.

OMG, I thought I was the only one who hates QT! I do not get the tongue bathing w/him.

Ferris is okay. I've seen it twice, have no desire to see it again, but don't hate it.

[Joe]

Tarantino is good at music. But I don't like his writing or directing or acting.

[Lazlo]

I saw Best Night Ever last night and thought it was... not bad actually. Definitely not a great movie and not even the funniest movie I've seen this summer but better than I expected given it was written and directed by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer (who gave us such 'classics' as Date Movie and Epic Movie.)

 

For those who haven't seen it the film is about a bachelorette trip to Las Vegas. It is not a spoof (ie. it isn't 'Vegas Movie') but a relatively low key comedy with a proper narrative and characters and everything. Too many gross out jokes for me and it was clearly trying too hard to be an all female version of The Hangover but again not bad and the leads are suprisingly likable.

[Danny Franks]

        This is how I'd address the (to me) ultimate actor of this type, John Wayne. No matter the character or genre, it was always JOHN WAYNE you saw on the screen. I also thought he was a better actor than many gave him credit for. 

While I can't abide John Wayne, I would definitely agree that people watch John Wayne movies because they want to see John Wayne. As you say, he probably is the ultimate example of this type of movie star.

 

It's also why Wayne should never, ever have agreed to play Genghis Khan. Yeesh.

[Snowprince]

NOBODY should have taken that part. He did deliver some good performances, though in The Searchers, The Quiet Man, True Grit and The Shootist. As far as acting goes, that's all I want. 

 

There was a thread on TWoP about movies/parts actors would gladly delete from their resumes, i suspect The Conquerer was one of his. Every performer has one or two.

[Julia]

I'm gonna guess everyone concerned would have gladly deleted The Conquerer from their resume, because it killed a lot of them.

[AstaCharles]

 

Colin Farrell should stick to comedies.

I haven't seen a lot of Farrell's films but I agree he's great in comedy and he was awesome as the villian in the Fright Night remake which I think was a pretty good film [if that is an unpopular opinion]

 

 

With all due respect to the late John Hughes, Better Off Dead is the best teen movie of the '80s (saw Breakfast Club as a teen back in the day, and I liked it but didn't **love** it... frankly, it left me a little cold for some reason).

 

Here I have to respectfully disagree w/you.

Fast Times at Ridgemont High is THE ultimate teen/young adult movie from the 80's.

 

I'm more of Better Off Dead kid myself, couldn't get into Fast Times . I never related to the any of the kids in the John Hughes movies as well. Actually the only teen movie I could relate to was Heaven Help Us and that was set in the '60's which was before my time. 

Edited July 17, 2014 by AstaCharles

[spaceytraci1208]

I really enjoyed Iron Man 3. I never read the comics so I thought the reveal of "The Mandarin" as this British actor named "Trevor" was hilarious which seems to be the plot point that pissed a lot of people off.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

My favorite performance by Colin Farrell is In Bruges.

[xls]

From way back:

Thank you!  I thought I was the only person on the planet to see this.  Everyone seems to ~~love~~ Grease, their favorite musical.  I see a horrible, horrible message for girls.  Not only does Sandy have to degrade herself to hang on to a guy, it's so his friends don't make fun of him for dating a good girl.  In my mind that's abusive, not cute or romantic.

ITA also. Dumb movie. Xanadu is far better.

[benteen]

I haven't seen a lot of Farrell's films but I agree he's great in comedy and he was awesome as the villian in the Fright Night remake which I think was a pretty good film [if that is an unpopular opinion]

 

 

I'm more of Better Off Dead kid myself, couldn't get into Fast Times . I never related to the any of the kids in the John Hughes movies as well. Actually the only teen movie I could relate to was Heaven Help Us and that was set in the '60's which was before my time. 

 

Colin Farrell was a riot in Horrible Bosses and so was Jennifer Aniston.  I think Aniston should stick with my comedy roles like the one she had in HB.

[VCRTracking]

 

There was a thread on TWoP about movies/parts actors would gladly delete from their resumes, i suspect The Conquerer was one of his. Every performer has one or two.

 

I think everybody who was in The Conquerer regretted it since they unknowingly filmed downwind of a nuclear test site in Nevada and most of the cast later ended up dying of cancer: Wayne, Dick Powell, Pedro Armandirez, Susan Hayward, Agnes Moorehead. Out of 220 cast and crew, 91 had developed some form of cancer and 46 died from the disease.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conqueror_(film)#Cancer_controversy

Edited July 17, 2014 by VCRTracking

[candall]

        This is how I'd address the (to me) ultimate actor of this type, John Wayne. No matter the character or genre, it was always JOHN WAYNE you saw on the screen. I also thought he was a better actor than many gave him credit for. 

This made me wonder whether John Wayne might have wanted to stretch his acting chops and was prevented by the studios.  "People pay money to see THE DUKE, damn it!"

 

There was a point when Elvis Presley wanted to be a serious actor and I've read--based on Flaming Star, Wild in the Country, Kid Creole--various critics maintain he had the potential for greatness. 

 

But his one-dimensional troubadour character made tons of money and apparently Elvis was incapable of fighting off Colonel Parker's control.  Makes me kind of sad for the lad.

 

I meandered off-topic.  "Unpopular Opinions," page 10!

[wanderingstar]

I was all ready to hate Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby, I can take or leave BL's movies, and goodness knows Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't do much for me. But I watched it the other day, and...I didn't hate it. Parts of it were actually fairly compelling (*feels forehead*). I guess it helped to have super low expectations. 

[Julia]

I was all ready to hate Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby, I can take or leave BL's movies, and goodness knows Leonardo DiCaprio doesn't do much for me. But I watched it the other day, and...I didn't hate it. Parts of it were actually fairly compelling (*feels forehead*). I guess it helped to have super low expectations. 

 

My daughter made me watch it, and I also hated it less than I expected to. On the other hand, I expected to because I thought Moulin Rouge! was one of the most dreadful movies I've ever seen reasonably talented actors wasted in.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Julia

[benteen]

This made me wonder whether John Wayne might have wanted to stretch his acting chops and was prevented by the studios.  "People pay money to see THE DUKE, damn it!"

 

There was a point when Elvis Presley wanted to be a serious actor and I've read--based on Flaming Star, Wild in the Country, Kid Creole--various critics maintain he had the potential for greatness. 

 

But his one-dimensional troubadour character made tons of money and apparently Elvis was incapable of fighting off Colonel Parker's control.  Makes me kind of sad for the lad.

 

I meandered off-topic.  "Unpopular Opinions," page 10!

 

Yeah, I've heard that about Elvis.  If he had put his foot down, he might have gotten those dramatic roles he wanted.

[Julia]

I've heard roughly the opposite about Wayne. He was supposedly very uncomfortable playing anything other than "John Wayne," and when he became an independent that was pretty much all he did from there on in.

[xls]

My daughter made me watch it, and I also hated it less than I expected to. On the other hand, I expected to because I thought Moulin Rouge! was one of the most dreadful movies I've ever seen reasonably talented actors wasted in.

Ick! I couldn't even make it through a few minutes of MR. A close-up of greasy, garishly-made up faces is all I remember.

[proserpina65]

I never understood the appeal of Natalie Portman (whose mouth is always agape) or Keira Knightley (whose jaw is always clenched).

 

 

I haven't seen Portman in enough things to have an opinion on her, but Keira Knightley has only ever been good in one thing, Bend It Like Beckham, and even in that, she was the least good performer in it.  And yes, she bloody well looks like she has tetanus 24-7.  Her performance in Pride and Prejudice was an abomination, although 99% of that film was an abomination, but she stood out as particularly awful.

Edited July 24, 2014 by proserpina65