The Movie House - Part 4

Don't call me James wrote:I would categorize Hardy and Fassbender in that same A-list category with Bale, Pitt, McConaughey, Leo, etc (can't think of everyone ff). But I personally think Leo is the cream of the crop of the A-listers. We'll have to agree to disagree.

IMO JGL needs 'that one' role to move him into that zone. Gyllenhaal and Casey Affleck likewise. Gyllenhaal's Nightcrawler was that film I feel, but I still feel skeptical of moving there too soon for whatever reason. Southpaw could do it, who knows.

Honestly a huge fan of all and consider this whole era to be quite fascinating in terms of talented A-list actors.

Gyllenhaal has delivered a career-defining performance in Nightcrawler. It's a crime he didn't win the academy award. No question. I am a big Leo fan, just think the he's overrated/overhyped, being called GOAT etc by the casual. I feel like he needs a few more great performances. His early career had some absolutely amazing roles, This Boy's Life, Gilbert Grape etc. But I feel like he's pretty much the same in the noughties. I have a good feeling about him in The Revenant, where I think he, Hardy and Anderson will be incredible. He looks like he's finally starting to do riskier characters.
He's a weird case though. He's in a lot of my favourite movies, but he never seems to be the best part of them. Hope it changes though, can never be too many great performers.

JGL also needs some career-defining performance soon. Maybe it will happen with Snowden. He is a lot like Leo imo, both child stars with baby-faces that haven't fulfilled the early promisses yet.

Just as you say Gyllenhaal should have the Oscar for Nightcrawler (I agree btw) Leo should have definitely won in 2005 for The Aviator, effing Jaime Fox winning over him was a joke.

I think that was one of his best performances and truly worth the Oscar win as opposed to the recent ones where people were calling for him.

El Shaarawy wrote:

RealGunner wrote:It was alright. Don't like Will Ferrell or Wahlberg that much so maybe I didn't enjoy as much as others but it wasn't that good imo.

You gotta admit, this scene though



The whole cinema was laughing for a straight 5 mins afterwards

"ITS A BAD TIME BOB!"




The Other Guys is a classic imo

Don't call me James wrote:Just as you say Gyllenhaal should have the Oscar for Nightcrawler (I agree btw) Leo should have definitely won in 2005 for The Aviator, effing Jaime Fox winning over him was a joke.

I think that was one of his best performances and truly worth the Oscar win as opposed to the recent ones where people were calling for him.

I have heard from everyone who's seen Hotel Rwanda, that it was Don Cheadle that was robbed and not Leo though. Not seen it yet though.

I've seen both films and am a fan of Don Cheadle, but imo no way man.

Both Leo and Kate Blanchett had by the two best performances that year and both came in the Aviator. And I think maybe one of the main reasons Leo didn't win was because Kate Blanchett also delivered a performance of a lifetime in the Aviator. One could say even overshadowing Leo in that film.

But similarly Jared Leto overshadowed McConaughey in Dallas' Buyers Club and it didn't affect McConaughey's chances even if he was overshadowed in that film.

Don't call me James wrote:I've seen both films and am a fan of Don Cheadle, but imo no way man.

Both Leo and Kate Blanchett had by the two best performances that year and both came in the Aviator. And I think maybe one of the main reasons Leo didn't win was because Kate Blanchett also delivered a performance of a lifetime in the Aviator. One could say even overshadowing Leo in that film.

But similarly Jared Leto overshadowed McConaughey in Dallas' Buyers Club and it didn't affect McConaughey's chances even if he was overshadowed in that film.

Still have no idea how Fassbender didn't win that year. He stole all his scenes in 12 years. Favourite performance of that year with Phoenix in Her.

RED wrote:The Loft(2014) 3/5. Wentworth Miller stars in this movie Decent twist at the end.

Five married guys conspire to secretly share a penthouse loft in the city--a place where they can carry out hidden affairs and indulge in their deepest fantasies. But the fantasy becomes a nightmare when they discover the dead body of an unknown woman in the loft, and they realize one of the group must be involved.

Solid movie. Great twists all the way through and has a sort of neo-noir feel about it.

Freeza wrote:

Don't call me James wrote:Just as you say Gyllenhaal should have the Oscar for Nightcrawler (I agree btw) Leo should have definitely won in 2005 for The Aviator, effing Jaime Fox winning over him was a joke.

I think that was one of his best performances and truly worth the Oscar win as opposed to the recent ones where people were calling for him.

I have heard from everyone who's seen Hotel Rwanda, that it was Don Cheadle that was robbed and not Leo though. Not seen it yet though.

Hotel Rwanda was a good film and Cheadle was brilliant, but IMO Leo was given a character in the Aviator who had so much more depth and character development than Cheadle's in Hotel Rwanda.

El Gunner wrote:lol Hesher is average, though I liked his character in it. I didn't like Brick in particular as well, didn't do it for me

JGL best is 50/50 imo, haven't seen Lookout or Mysterious Skin yet so I'll try that.

Oh and Gosling is a beast ffs! The Place Beyond the Pines anyone? Also Blue Valentine has been on my watchlist for some time now.

SOOOOOO MANY MOVIES  

Yea Hesher didnt live up to the hype and everything. Still I kinda liked that film. But it wasnt JGL's film by any means. He was playing second fiddle to that kid. So... yea may be I should rate 500 days higher than hesher. It was a better film overall.

Na, brick is a very distinctive type of film making. I dont even know what thats called, that... style. It was pretty cool.  The dialogues and all were pretty impressive. Smartly made movie it was. Lookout is a more toned down version of Brick actually but different genres.

Yea Place beyond the Pines was spectacular. Easily one of my fav films that year. Blue Valentine was just as special. Was gut wrenching actually.
My favorite Gosling flick was however Lars and the real girl. Was one of a kind movie for me, that one. But its only just, the margin.

Freeza wrote:

Don't call me James wrote:I would categorize Hardy and Fassbender in that same A-list category with Bale, Pitt, McConaughey, Leo, etc (can't think of everyone ff). But I personally think Leo is the cream of the crop of the A-listers. We'll have to agree to disagree.

IMO JGL needs 'that one' role to move him into that zone. Gyllenhaal and Casey Affleck likewise. Gyllenhaal's Nightcrawler was that film I feel, but I still feel skeptical of moving there too soon for whatever reason. Southpaw could do it, who knows.

Honestly a huge fan of all and consider this whole era to be quite fascinating in terms of talented A-list actors.

Gyllenhaal has delivered a career-defining performance in Nightcrawler. It's a crime he didn't win the academy award. No question. I am a big Leo fan, just think the he's overrated/overhyped, being called GOAT etc by the casual. I feel like he needs a few more great performances. His early career had some absolutely amazing roles, This Boy's Life, Gilbert Grape etc. But I feel like he's pretty much the same in the noughties. I have a good feeling about him in The Revenant, where I think he, Hardy and Anderson will be incredible. He looks like he's finally starting to do riskier characters.
He's a weird case though. He's in a lot of my favourite movies, but he never seems to be the best part of them. Hope it changes though, can never be too many great performers.

JGL also needs some career-defining performance soon. Maybe it will happen with Snowden. He is a lot like Leo imo, both child stars with baby-faces that haven't fulfilled the early promisses yet.

I'll put Michael Shannon in there as well. Criminally underrated (probably because people havent seen much, lol) . That man needs to do a lot more films tbf. Such a reservoir of talent.
EDIT lol it seems he is doing exactly that. 9 films in total in 2015 and 16 on IMDb!! Bah G !!! Cant wait. (One of them apparently is titled Elvis & Nixon and has Shannon playing Elvis Presley and the GOAT Kevin Spacey playing Richard Nixon. )

Agree a little bit with all of you. Love all those actors as well, but have to agree more with James here. Leo DiCaprio is the best of his generation however, I strongly feel Gyllenhaal isn't far behind. Talking about career defining roles I also believe Hardy still needs one as well. His been doing a crazy amount of films recently but I think he should just get a role, a complex in-depth character like Leo as Howard Hughes in The Aviator. Leo was *bleep* at 2005 Oscars tbh, I've always said that, maintain by that, but then also here is where I agree with Freeza that he, I believe, he didn't really have a case in any subsequent year like lots of people have made it out to be.

I think there was always one or two better performances since then in each year when he has been nominated. I feel the closest he has gotten since then is The Wolf of Wall Street, but Phoenix absolutely killed it that year and I'm also of the believe he should've won it by some distance at the end. But whatever.

I like them all and appreciate them all. Ranking these actors will always be done by some, but I see no real need in it.

Forza wrote:

Freeza wrote:

Don't call me James wrote:Just as you say Gyllenhaal should have the Oscar for Nightcrawler (I agree btw) Leo should have definitely won in 2005 for The Aviator, effing Jaime Fox winning over him was a joke.

I think that was one of his best performances and truly worth the Oscar win as opposed to the recent ones where people were calling for him.

I have heard from everyone who's seen Hotel Rwanda, that it was Don Cheadle that was robbed and not Leo though. Not seen it yet though.

Hotel Rwanda was a good film and Cheadle was brilliant, but IMO Leo was given a character in the Aviator who had so much more depth and character development than Cheadle's in Hotel Rwanda.

Completely agreed. 2005 was robbery, it was Leo's Oscar. I watched Hotel Rwanda and The Aviator both, Leo's performance trumps Cheadle's for me.

And Leo is amazing, I don't find him overrated in any way. I know he is gonna be amazing on The Revenant again. Can see another Oscar nomination. Imo he should have been nominated on 2010 for Shutter Island. He was amazing in Django too. His drugged scene in The Wolf Of Wall Street is one of my favorite acting performances ever. He was unlucky that Dallas Buyers Club was released that year.

I think Hardy in Bronson is one of the performances of last decade behind DDL as Plainview. He was amazing.

Watched Hotel Rwanda back in school in one of our R.E lessons

Dat teaching.

looooool we watched a lot of films like that.

Think it was anti-discrimination week or something.

Jurassic world absolutely destroying the box office atm lol

Made half of Avegners:AOU in just 4 days

205m$ US and Canada this weekend. 500m$ world wide.
Second biggest opening in US/Canada history it looks like.

Freeza wrote:I think Hardy in Bronson is one of the performances of last decade behind DDL as Plainview. He was amazing.

lol but do you think a lot of people know about it. I only learned about Bronson through Letterboxd. The role needs to be big/mainstream as well.

And I don't think he was THAT good in Bronson (mainly probably because I didn't like the film that much) I could list a whole lot of better performaces from the previous decade.

Just finished the last of PTA's films (The Master) and I can't come up with a director from that generation that's better as an artist. He's absolutely out of this world. He'll be up on the GOAT list when everything's set and done. Don't know if anyone can get as much out of actors as he is able to. Every single one of his films he's elevated everyone in them to incredible heights.

There's something poetic about how Jurassic World (the park) is directly referenced as a shallow, corporate shadow of Jurassic Park (the park, or dream thereof) when Jurassic World (the movie) is a shallow, corporate shadow of Jurassic Park (the movie)...


All in all Jurassic World is about on par with The Lost World and Jurassic Park III... which is to say its "decent" or "mediocre."  Flat, mostly unlikable characters (Pratt and his raptor pack being the notable exceptions) fill in cliched roles while moving through cliched plot points.  The graphics and effects are (mostly) good but the choppy camera work distracts from them on more than one occasion and pacing felt inconsistent.  I wasn't expecting too much from this film and it basically met those expectations dead on.

Watched Jurassic world and basically echo RO's thoughts.


I don't know if the movie was supposed to be intentionally funny but I spent half the time laughing at how cheesy some of the scenes and lines were. The mother was awful. Starts crying as soon as she calls her sister lmao. That was so forced.

Drama was its downfall and should not have been included. One cheesy line after another. Cliche dialogues and flat characters apart from few

Chris pratt was great and the Indian actor was good too. Rest were quite forgettable.

Can't believe Kingpin was in it. I didn't even recognise him till my mate told me.

But it was still fun to watch. Dinosaurs were as good as you would expect, eventhough there weren't that many. It felt like they tried to make it an action film with dinosaurs being the supporting casts.

Spoiler:

6.8/10

Not gonna watch Jurassic World. Ant Man is my next theater visit unless it turns out seriously meh. No Entourage in my country

Ant-Man, MI5 and F4 all in the space of 3 weeks. Will try watch all 3

Will probably catch Ant-Man. Depends.

Did you manage to watch mad max?