Is this Redmayne chap actually that good, or is he another Oscar darling like Jennifer Lawrence who must get nominated every year? She's quite good, but not special enough to be capable of winning two best actress awards already.
Oscars 2016
- Thread starter CassiusClaymore
- Start date
He is, wonderful actor. Lawrence is also a very talented one. She got nominated the first time in 2010, before she hit it big, so it's not purely politics, although I have an inkling she'll win this year due to her activism.
No. He is good but doesn't deserve it this year and Vikander was better then him in his film. Also, giving him two in a row would be an insult to truly great actors who haven't won two in a row.
You ain't gonna be an Oscar darling if you ain't talented. You've got to have the chops to get these baity roles in the first place. Sure it's annoying that the same band of people just go for baity stuff. Not much we can do about it, but it's no different than any award show, always got their favourites.
I watched Bridge of Spies today, admittedly with pretty low expectations going in otherwise I would of seen it by now, but I was quite impressed, not many can make such a mild budget go so far, good film, had a bit of Le Carre/Tinker Tailor all over it, which was a nice touch from Spielberg, Hanks is barely trying and yet is good, he's got it down, effortless performance which led the film superbly, though not heavy enough for any award(not it matters, they randomly ignored him for his sublime effort in Phillips anyway), top support too.
I watched Bridge of Spies today, admittedly with pretty low expectations going in otherwise I would of seen it by now, but I was quite impressed, not many can make such a mild budget go so far, good film, had a bit of Le Carre/Tinker Tailor all over it, which was a nice touch from Spielberg, Hanks is barely trying and yet is good, he's got it down, effortless performance which led the film superbly, though not heavy enough for any award(not it matters, they randomly ignored him for his sublime effort in Phillips anyway), top support too.
I really thought it was nothing special. I mean, it was fine, and Hanks was likable as ever but it felt a bit too heavy on the whole "look how great we Americans treat our captives" angle. Maybe it was just me but it did irritate me.
I really enjoyed The Revenant but I don't think Leo was particularly amazing in it, or Hardy for that matter. Just a good 8/10 sorta Leo performance, like he always gives us. I reckon he'll likely get the Oscar though, just by virtue of the fact everyone reckons he should have one by now - like with Scorsese.
I've read that there's a lot of fall out due to the lack of diversity in the nominees. I think Jada Pinkett Smith isn't attending to make a statement.
Tbh, I don't think I've seen any of the nominee movies aside form Mad Max, so, I can't really pass a comment - but are the nominees there on merit? Is Straight Outta Compton better than say...The Revenant? (Haven't seen either, bit there's a lot of fanfare around the latter).
Tbh, I don't think I've seen any of the nominee movies aside form Mad Max, so, I can't really pass a comment - but are the nominees there on merit? Is Straight Outta Compton better than say...The Revenant? (Haven't seen either, bit there's a lot of fanfare around the latter).
He's good but also bad. Check out Jupiter Ascending. He was ridiculous in that one.
I've heard he's been dreadful in a few roles but I've only seen him in The Theory of Everything - which he won the Oscar for last year. I was very very impressed with him in that, I hate the 'Oscar bait' criticism that film gets, it's one of the stupidest things you can say against a film. To win an Oscar you have to be at least a good film, how dare they try and make a film good enough to win the most prestigious award in film!
Went off on a tangent there, my point is he's superb in The Theory of Everything and fully deserved the Oscar.
It's easy to call out the Oscars but the fact is that the problem is with the roles, not the awards. Black actors make up about ~7% of the SAG actors there and they are what ~14% of the US population? There's a discrepancy right there. I've not seen the stats for Latinos but I imagine it's even bigger since they are even less prominent in film and make up a larger proportion of the population.
Taking those stats into consideration, black actors have actually been punching above the weight in the past years. Since 2000 black actors have received 12,5% of the acting nominations and 18,75% of the wins.
Taking those stats into consideration, black actors have actually been punching above the weight in the past years. Since 2000 black actors have received 12,5% of the acting nominations and 18,75% of the wins.
Watched Room last night, can't see how Brie Larson will not win.
Straight Outta Compton is a very good film that ticked all the boxes for nomination really, I'm not gonna cry racial snub as plenty of films backed and featuring prominently white roles that have also ticked all the boxes have also been snubbed relentlessly in the past....it's just that theres usually only a small minority of black backed projects in the running, and despite doing well with critics, box office thus the audience, and doing solid rounds are precursors.....in back to back years, Selma and Straight Outta Compton have oddly been left out when heavily favoured to at worst make certain big category nominations....make of it what you will.
To be fair, some winners aren't even very good films. I'm looking at you, Slumdog Millionaire.
There are many examples of where the best film of the year probably lost out (I'd have either Shawshank or Pulp Fiction winning over Forrest Gump, as much as I love it. Also, Shakespeare in Love beat Saving Private Ryan) but I don't think the Oscar winner has ever been a genuinely bad film. YOU may not like Slumdog Millionaire, but a lot of people do, it might not be in discussions for the greatest ever but it definitely isn't a bad film.
Redmayne is a bit of a hack for me. He was great in Theory of Everything but was equally awful in Jupiter Ascending. Great actors don't put out the shit he put out in that film.
Yes they do. Not that I've seen Jupiter Ascending, but I somehow reckon it was a contractual obligation film, actually maybe not, he didn't have a name for himself then(filmed before ToE), so just said yes to a potential blockbuster and get the name out there. But better actors have done pointless roles and it's shown.
He was good in Les Mis though and also has a Tony award, clearly got chops, though maybe now should branch out from bait heavy roles.
He was good in Les Mis though and also has a Tony award, clearly got chops, though maybe now should branch out from bait heavy roles.
Last edited:
Yeah, she was amazing and so was the kid.
It wasn't a pointless role. It was downright awful. Really awful. Sometimes great actors have bad roles and perform it well, he played it so bad. Its hard to forget when people mention him as a great actor.
Yeah, I can't forget Tommy Lee Jones in Blown Away either, shit actor.
Oddly enough, that godawful performance also came the year after he won an oscar too. Best not mention Forest Whitaker showing up to the Battlefield Earth party or a certain heavyweights joke role role in Rocky and Bulwinkle(though I guess more excused as he was starting his retirement party of full on endless crap)
Take on a shit script for whatever reasons and it's gonna be a shit performance regardless.
Oddly enough, that godawful performance also came the year after he won an oscar too. Best not mention Forest Whitaker showing up to the Battlefield Earth party or a certain heavyweights joke role role in Rocky and Bulwinkle(though I guess more excused as he was starting his retirement party of full on endless crap)
Take on a shit script for whatever reasons and it's gonna be a shit performance regardless.
Neither are truly great actors and neither roles are as bad as Redmaynes.
Please tell me you aren't saying that De Niro isn't a great actor.
I'm not a Redmayne fan either, but great actors can patently, on occasion, take duff roles.
Okay this is pointless. I'm not even sure why it's gone into "truly great", but all three actors I referenced are as of now better than Redmayne given he only has 3 real roles and a few stage stuff to his name and they all clearly have pretty stellar filmographies.
I'm not gonna go out of my way to watch Jupiter Ascending either, so you are going to hold that over me, even though a dreadful hammy over the top performance is the same thing regardless of whos doing it in whatever film and most greats have them on their filmography. It's the same kind of shit, how you rank it I don't know.
I'm not gonna go out of my way to watch Jupiter Ascending either, so you are going to hold that over me, even though a dreadful hammy over the top performance is the same thing regardless of whos doing it in whatever film and most greats have them on their filmography. It's the same kind of shit, how you rank it I don't know.
All of them do. Brando's performance in The Islands of Dr. Moreau was terrible as was his attitude towards the movie. The movie is terrible, the making of is a comedy.
So next year a black will win an Oscar 
Never even noticed DeNiro. Sorry about that.
I don't think DeNiro is anymore though. He hasn't had a good role in years and is just fecking around at this point.
Agree here. He has a very small filmography, one great performance, one good performance and one awful performance. Not enough to be rated as a great actor IMO.
Jen Lawrence 10/1 and Fassbender 20/1
Worth a go or nay?
Worth a go or nay?
I'd like Di Caprio to win, only because I think he should have won one over 20 years ago for What's Eating Gilbert Grape. I'm not so interested in him these days but he was fantastic when he started and made a lot of great films then
No. Brie Larson has that sewn up I reckon. Same for Leo in the men's.
I saw Creed at the weekend and how did that director not get a nomination. You have a fairly simple screenplay that he turned into one of the best reviewed films of the year and got one of the best performances out of Stallone ever. There's a single shot take in there as well that goes on for about 5 minutes that is incredible.
I like Leo but I watched The Revenant last night and I was really really bored. If I wanted to watch things crawl around amongst beautiful scenery I'd watch Planet Earth.
Thought the opposite. Great, great film. Can see why it would divide opinions though.
I am however, totally fed up of Tom hardy. Just plays the same mumbling character every film only with a different accent. Yawn.
Does he? Other then the mumbling (Which is annoying) there isn't too much link between his characters.
I dunno I think there could have been a great film in there somewhere, but feel they probably could have cut an hour out of it.
I didnt really feel like I cared about any of the characters either.
I think the characters Hardy has chosen and played over the years are very different, yep. Definitely wouldn't characterize them as the 'same mumbling character'.
The characters are different but Hardy is always the same.
The plot was definitely a bit thin but the film was more about the directing and cinematography for me than the plot/characters. I know that's probably a bit weird to say about a 2 1/2 hour film but I was genuinely blown away throughout.
Maybe it's just that all the black actors were fecking shite this year...
I didn't see Will Smith complaining when he won one a few years back either, the complete cnut...
Just playing the race card whenever it suits you is a complete cnuts trick...
I didn't see Will Smith complaining when he won one a few years back either, the complete cnut...
Just playing the race card whenever it suits you is a complete cnuts trick...
How so?
that and her naked selfies...
Michael B. Jordan? Possibly... especially when Damon got nominated for basically being Matt Damon on Mars and Eddie Redmayne got nominated for a ludicriously showy performance. In my opinion Jordan's is a far stronger performance then either of those two, but can see why he didn't get it.
Coogler for directing? Probably... though it's a tougher field, but Coogler had a bigger challenge on his shoulders and did something far more visually arresting with his film then, say, McCarthy did for Spotlight. I mean, he actually managed to bring new things to the boxing/sport genre with his camera work.
The film? Absolutely 100% should have been nominated. I mean, the Oscars gave Million Dollar fecking Baby the best picture award!! And this is about 100 times better then that film. It's a feel-good, underdog, crowd-pleaser, that critics and audiences loved... and the Academy generally love those attributes... So yeah, very weird it didn't get nominated.
Will Smith has never won an Oscar.
Also, they weren't... Elba was feckin' magnificent in Beasts of No Nation... as was the kid in the lead role. Widening the scope, Del Toro was a career best in Sicario, and Jackson was better then he's been in god knows how long in Hateful Eight.
As a complete aside, the only black person to ever win an oscar for a role that didn't have to be played by a black person is Denzel Washington for Training Day, which I found kinda interesting.