|
Post by wilcinema on Oct 3, 2018 14:28:36 GMT
To be quite honest, Bale was the one who least impressed me in this trailer. His looks more like an impersonation than an actual performance. Rockwell and Adams, YES!
|
|
|
Post by Sharbs on Oct 3, 2018 14:35:24 GMT
Rockwell looks actually kinda bad from this footage
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Oct 3, 2018 14:41:43 GMT
Rockwell looks actually kinda bad from this footage Agreed. But I think the fact that the Bush/Cheney scene they frame the trailer around seems totally phony doesn't really help him out.
|
|
|
Post by Billy_Costigan on Oct 3, 2018 15:28:23 GMT
I just can't buy the idea of this film winning anything in the current climate we're in. The makeup looks good (better than last year's winner by a mile) and might be a strong contender there, but I just can't see them wanting to recognize a film about Dick Cheney, regardless of the quality. Nominations, sure, but the last time that a portrayal of a truly controversial living figure got a nomination was James Woods as Byron de la Beckwith in 1996. Even if the film scathingly indicts Cheney and eviscerates him, which I expect it will, I can't see Bale beating Cooper's narrative at this point. I don't disagree. I'm just having trouble finding a real challenger for Cooper right now.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 3, 2018 15:37:19 GMT
Just a couple of pics, but they are mighty impressive. I think barring the film being dreadful, a nomination is looking really solid for Bale. I don't see him winning though. This feels like where they'll award Cooper, as he's probably getting a few nominations this year, including his forth acting nod. Bale won before, and an actor playing a politician in a biopic won last year. Bale won before but it's supporting category, this time he will win the lead category! Fuck cooper, oscar voters prefer historical figure that shocked the nation than kris kristofferson wannabe! I am afraid I have to agree with ray here - look I prefer anyone to Cooper always - but am willing to admit America wrongly loves him, you're welcome to him, reconcile yourselves with God I guess - but I don't see why people are thinking he's directing himself to an Oscar and BP and directing himself and his female lead to an Oscar too. If Bale can win and that looks greatish it's a historic, shapeshifting win particularly after Gary Oldman's fat-suit win and I am a big Oldman fan but this is a DeNiro level body adjustment and if he wins a 2nd Oscar for it, it's an all-timer sort of thing.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 15:53:49 GMT
Bale won before but it's supporting category, this time he will win the lead category! Fuck cooper, oscar voters prefer historical figure that shocked the nation than kris kristofferson wannabe! I am afraid I have to agree with ray here - look I prefer anyone to Cooper always - but am willing to admit America wrongly loves him, you're welcome to him, reconcile yourselves with God I guess - but I don't see why people are thinking he's directing himself to an Oscar and BP and directing himself and his female lead to an Oscar too. If Bale can win and that looks greatish it's a historic, shapeshifting win particularly after Gary Oldman's fat-suit win and I am a big Oldman fan but this is a DeNiro level body adjustment and if he wins a 2nd Oscar for it, it's an all-timer sort of thing. Because Bradley Cooper has a strong potential of getting five Oscar nominations in a single night (Picture, Director, Actor, Screenplay, Song). It is unprecedented for anyone to get that many nominations in a single night and lose. And Cooper is the face of his film. If they're going to reward him anywhere, it'll be in Best Actor, although he's probably going to go home with at least two Oscars if Original Song pans out. Bale, meanwhile, has an incredibly uphill climb to a win because despite the physical transformation angle, he's still playing one of the most controversial, loathsome political figures alive (key word there: alive). Even if the film excoriates Cheney, to recognize a performance like that with a win actually would be unprecedented; most controversial figures like Nixon, Churchill, even Idi Amin, etc. had to wait until the real-life counterparts were dead before the actors were even recognized with nominations. In this turbulent political climate, I just can't see the Academy wanting to recognize the film beyond paying lip service to it for its quality.
|
|
dazed
Based
Posts: 2,631
Likes: 1,797
|
Post by dazed on Oct 3, 2018 16:01:45 GMT
I think the style of the trailer is what’s making the performances seem like impersonations. The cheesy edit with the billing of actors at the end and a Killers song that has a pop tone being the major reasons why.
I’m excited though. I think this is going to be really, really good. Will be an actors showcase.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 3, 2018 16:06:53 GMT
I am afraid I have to agree with ray here - look I prefer anyone to Cooper always - but am willing to admit America wrongly loves him, you're welcome to him, reconcile yourselves with God I guess - but I don't see why people are thinking he's directing himself to an Oscar and BP and directing himself and his female lead to an Oscar too. If Bale can win and that looks greatish it's a historic, shapeshifting win particularly after Gary Oldman's fat-suit win and I am a big Oldman fan but this is a DeNiro level body adjustment and if he wins a 2nd Oscar for it, it's an all-timer sort of thing. Because Bradley Cooper has a strong potential of getting five Oscar nominations in a single night (Picture, Director, Actor, Screenplay, Song). It is unprecedented for anyone to get that many nominations in a single night and lose. And Cooper is the face of his film. If they're going to reward him anywhere, it'll be in Best Actor, although he's probably going to go home with at least two Oscars if Original Song pans out.Bale, meanwhile, has an incredibly uphill climb to a win because despite the physical transformation angle, he's still playing one of the most controversial, loathsome political figures alive (key word there: alive). Even if the film excoriates Cheney, to recognize a performance like that with a win actually would be unprecedented; most controversial figures like Nixon, Churchill, even Idi Amin, etc. had to wait until the real-life counterparts were dead before the actors were even recognized with nominations. In this turbulent political climate, I just can't see the Academy wanting to recognize the film beyond paying lip service to it for its quality. I dunno, he's winning Best Picture I figure, I don't necessarily think he's that strong in actor - but what do I know maybe I'm misunderstanding this circle jerk for him - Picture, song, actress seems like plenty.....more than plenty.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 16:16:59 GMT
Because Bradley Cooper has a strong potential of getting five Oscar nominations in a single night (Picture, Director, Actor, Screenplay, Song). It is unprecedented for anyone to get that many nominations in a single night and lose. And Cooper is the face of his film. If they're going to reward him anywhere, it'll be in Best Actor, although he's probably going to go home with at least two Oscars if Original Song pans out.Bale, meanwhile, has an incredibly uphill climb to a win because despite the physical transformation angle, he's still playing one of the most controversial, loathsome political figures alive (key word there: alive). Even if the film excoriates Cheney, to recognize a performance like that with a win actually would be unprecedented; most controversial figures like Nixon, Churchill, even Idi Amin, etc. had to wait until the real-life counterparts were dead before the actors were even recognized with nominations. In this turbulent political climate, I just can't see the Academy wanting to recognize the film beyond paying lip service to it for its quality. I dunno, he's winning Best Picture I figure, I don't necessarily think he's that strong in actor - but what do I know maybe I'm misunderstanding this circle jerk for him - Picture, song, actress seems like plenty.....more than plenty. Best Actor is looking far, far sparser than Best Actress. And Gaga is easily the frontrunner in Song, so they may decide that is where she can win while rewarding someone like Close or one of The Favourite gals or McCarthy in Actress. But Cooper's getting strong notices across the board (largely even over Gaga herself; it's rare that the Norman/Jackson Maine character gets those sorts of notices over the titular character in A Star Is Born adaptations, and yet that's happening here), and his closest competition is Bale (whose cons I've already outlined) and Redford (who has an extremely tiny movie). It's not a circle jerk for Cooper as much as it is analyzing the landscape of the race and realizing that if A Star Is Born is as big as it seems to be, where is the right place to reward it? Best Actor is more of a given than Best Actress, because it's acknowledging Bradley Cooper, the one who directed/produced/co-wrote/starred in it as well as wrote a song or two. Gaga just has the acting and the songwriting, but she also has the far more difficult category in the former. It just seems like you're not wanting to acknowledge Cooper as the frontrunner in this category because . . . what? Because he self-directed? That precedent was shattered in 1948, and again in 1998. Now here we are (in a year ending with 8!), and he's the face of what looks to be the monolithic crowdpleaser of the year, with a potential five nominations in a single year to add to his four unsuccessful bids, and he is campaigning hard. There's really no downside to him. He's probably the surest bet of the year in terms of the acting awards, like it or not, because he has so much going for him this year. What's his downside?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 3, 2018 16:35:39 GMT
I guess his downside is - he's not a particularly good actor to me in general, Viggo Mortensen is clearly a threat and you skipped him entirely (wtf stephen), it's very tough to direct yourself to an Oscar etc. I don't buy that a precedent was "shattered" because one guy has done it in the last 50 years either? He's not going to win ANY precursors except the Globe either.
Not saying it's impossible but I don't think its as inevitable as people are making it out to be.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 16:46:17 GMT
I guess his downside is - he's not a particularly good actor to me in general, Viggo Mortensen is clearly a threat and you skipped him entirely (wtf stephen), it's very tough to direct yourself to an Oscar etc. I don't buy that a precedent was "shattered" because one guy has done it in the last 50 years either? He's not going to win ANY precursors except the Globe either. Not saying it's impossible but I don't think its as inevitable as people are making it out to be. I don't think he's a good actor in general at all, either, but that doesn't mean anything when evaluating an actor's chances with the Academy. He's clearly very popular with them, having three consecutive acting nods (and a producer nomination as well) from 2012-14. Mortensen is a threat for a nomination, but a win? Doubtful. The guy doesn't really like to campaign as it is, and I think he'd win only if Green Book became the big Picture threat and if A Star Is Born got walloped by backlash, as well as if Universal decided to throw all their weight behind him instead of Gosling and if Mortensen played ball. Which I don't really see happening, as I don't think Viggo is hungry for it the way guys like Cooper are. I dunno about Cooper missing out on precursors. He seems very assuredly on target to take SAG, at the very least; they love him there as well and he campaigns like crazy. He probably wins whichever Globe category he's in, just judging from his competition. BAFTA might be more difficult, true, but who's he going to lose to? Bale, playing a reviled American politician? They don't seem like they really even like Bale all that much over there, despite his "hometown advantage" (he didn't even win the BAFTA in his mega-sweep in 2010). The precedent of directing oneself to an Oscar was shattered, once by one of the most renowned actors ever and once by a guy no one had ever heard of before 1998. Cooper falls closer to the former than the latter. Hell, Denzel Washington came really close to doing it in 2016. But this time, Cooper's poised to get a Director nomination on top of that. His name's gonna be all over the ballot. They likely won't wanna give him Director, I still think it could miss winning Picture at the end, but Actor and Song seem secure at this point. There are no locks in October, but every year there's at least one race you can more or less lay easy money on and it pays off. Best Actor is that race this year, at least from where I'm sittin'. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I don't see any reasonable alternative at this point. Bale would have to overcome so much, sweep the critics and the industry prizes, campaign his ass off, weather any anti-Cheney backlash his film might take (regardless of the film's overall tack on the man), and (most importantly) hope that Cooper's love cools off. But I don't see that happening.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Oct 3, 2018 16:59:49 GMT
This looks great, and a solid takedown / mock-up of the Bush administration. The makeup is fantastic, and the performances all seem spot-on. Super looking forward to this.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Oct 3, 2018 18:44:59 GMT
I am afraid I have to agree with ray here - look I prefer anyone to Cooper always - but am willing to admit America wrongly loves him, you're welcome to him, reconcile yourselves with God I guess - but I don't see why people are thinking he's directing himself to an Oscar and BP and directing himself and his female lead to an Oscar too. If Bale can win and that looks greatish it's a historic, shapeshifting win particularly after Gary Oldman's fat-suit win and I am a big Oldman fan but this is a DeNiro level body adjustment and if he wins a 2nd Oscar for it, it's an all-timer sort of thing. Because Bradley Cooper has a strong potential of getting five Oscar nominations in a single night (Picture, Director, Actor, Screenplay, Song). It is unprecedented for anyone to get that many nominations in a single night and lose. And Cooper is the face of his film. If they're going to reward him anywhere, it'll be in Best Actor, although he's probably going to go home with at least two Oscars if Original Song pans out. Bale, meanwhile, has an incredibly uphill climb to a win because despite the physical transformation angle, he's still playing one of the most controversial, loathsome political figures alive (key word there: alive). Even if the film excoriates Cheney, to recognize a performance like that with a win actually would be unprecedented; most controversial figures like Nixon, Churchill, even Idi Amin, etc. had to wait until the real-life counterparts were dead before the actors were even recognized with nominations. In this turbulent political climate, I just can't see the Academy wanting to recognize the film beyond paying lip service to it for its quality. Your argument makes 0 sense to me. Haven't seen either so no dog in the fight yet, but I fail to see how an excoriating portrayal of a loathsome Republican is less likely to be rewarded at a time with a loathsome Republican president?? Makes no sense! If anything it would be a BONUS since it would be seen as an ANTI-TRUMP VOTE as much as an anti-Cheney/GWB vote. You act as if "turbulent political climate" (i.e. Hollywood liberal politics out of power) means voters are less likely to embrace films that champion their politics & condemn those they oppose, when I think the complete OPPOSITE is probably more accurate. In a super tight race like Penn/Rourke in '08, the Prop 8 vote in California is often suspected to have made the difference. Also, your stat is pretty misleading imo because it just symbolizes that it's quite rare to see high profile biopics of still living polarizing figures on the big screen more so than a trend by AMPAS to snub such portrayals. If GAME CHANGE had been a theatrical release, Julianne Moore (still overdue at that point) would have been a SERIOUS threat for her Sarah Palin portrayal.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 18:57:10 GMT
Your argument makes 0 sense to me. Haven't seen either so no dog in the fight yet, but I fail to see how an excoriating portrayal of a loathsome Republican is less likely to be rewarded at a time with a loathsome Republican president?? Makes no sense! If anything it would be a BONUS since it would be seen as an ANTI-TRUMP VOTE as much as an anti-Cheney/GWB vote. You act as if "turbulent political climate" (i.e. Hollywood liberal politics out of power) means voters are less likely to embrace films that champion their politics & condemn those they oppose, when I think the complete OPPOSITE is probably more accurate. In a super tight race like Penn/Rourke in '08, the Prop 8 vote in California is often suspected to have made the difference. Also, your stat is pretty useless imo and just symbolizes how rare it is to see high profile biopics of still living polarizing figures than a trend by AMPAS to snub such portrayals. If GAME CHANGE had been a theatrical release, Julianne Moore (still overdue at that point) would have been a SERIOUS threat for her Sarah Palin portrayal. It would be seen as an acknowledgment of Cheney himself, the good and the bad. Having not seen the film itself, I am not sure if it's going to take an entirely negative tack on the man himself (surely, his machinations that caused the Iraq quagmire and everything else during that administration will be the primary focus of the film, and not in a positive way, but for a biopic, it generally will need to somewhat humanize its subject in order for the audience to watch it). I just find it hard to imagine that voters will be so enamored with it that they'll want to actually vote for it, regardless of their politics, because it deals with such a toxic figure. It's true that a lot of high-profile biopics of living polarizing figures don't get made, but those that do rarely wind up actually making a dent in the race. For Bale to have any real shot at winning, he would need to be truly undeniable. Like, "critical juggernaut sweeping the field"-level undeniable. And with Cooper in the way, I don't see that happening. Maybe it's just me, but it feels like the nominations it gets will be its ultimate reward, with the makeup likely being what it takes home a prize for. I still suspect that Rourke lost largely because of his previous antics and not because of Prop 8 (though that was certainly timely). The race had run extremely close by the end and Penn had lapped Rourke for the SAG. Rourke's reputation as an asshole was still very much a cloud hanging over him, and that was back when people still liked Sean Penn. Politics may have figured into it, but I thought back then that when Rourke lost SAG, he lost the Oscar, and it was almost entirely because he's not particularly well-liked by his peers. The Emmys are kind of a different bird, largely rewarding A-list stars who (until recently) were seen to stoop down to work for "lowly" television. This isn't to say that Moore wouldn't have gotten a nomination if she'd been in a theatrical release (it would obviously depend on what studio pushed her), but I don't think she had a prayer of beating Lawrence. At most she might've taken Watts or Wallis's spot, but I don't think she would've won. It should also be noted that as controversial as Palin is, she pales in comparison to Cheney in that regard. Palin is largely seen as a joke. Cheney is seen as the mastermind who many blame for creating a global catastrophe that still endures today.
|
|
rhodoraonline
Badass
Your Generosity Hides Something Dirtier and Meaner
Posts: 1,027
Likes: 505
|
Post by rhodoraonline on Oct 3, 2018 20:03:37 GMT
I have been regarding all these arguments and honestly, I see weight in all of them. Imho, it will all come down to how it plays out and whose campaigns suffers, if any, any backlash or derailment, or picks major boost by consistent critics in its favor. Knowing McKay, even though he knows he has a major awards player, in all likeliness his film & performances will be in the service of HIS vision of this biopic rather than what's consideres typical oscar-bait. Mortensen and Cooper's roles, sight unseen, sound lije tailor-made Oscar cuts, of which Bradley is def the juggernaut. Chalamet and Gosling are pretty much seat-fillers at this point and will merely join Mortensen (or a surprise 6th choice) in the lineup.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Oct 3, 2018 20:40:05 GMT
The Big Short was garbage and this somehow looks worse, and Bale isn't convincing AT ALL in that trailer.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 20:40:25 GMT
I have been regarding all these arguments and honestly, I see weight in all of them. Imho, it will all come down to how it plays out and whose campaigns suffers, if any, any backlash or derailment, or picks major boost by consistent critics in its favor. Knowing McKay, even though he knows he has a major awards player, in all likeliness his film & performances will be in the service of HIS vision of this biopic rather than what's consideres typical oscar-bait. Mortensen and Cooper's roles, sight unseen, sound lije tailor-made Oscar cuts, of which Bradley is def the juggernaut. Chalamet and Gosling are pretty much seat-fillers at this point and will merely join Mortensen (or a surprise 6th choice) in the lineup. They're running Chalamet in supporting for Beautiful Boy.
|
|
rhodoraonline
Badass
Your Generosity Hides Something Dirtier and Meaner
Posts: 1,027
Likes: 505
|
Post by rhodoraonline on Oct 3, 2018 20:41:17 GMT
Just wanted to put this here. No idea how to link it properly on phone.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2018 21:12:56 GMT
Just wanted to put this here. No idea how to link it properly on phone. In that particular image, from the eyes up, he looks an awful lot like Russell Crowe. I'd have liked to see his take on Cheney.
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Oct 3, 2018 21:27:51 GMT
I don't give a fuck about this film. I just hope that Lynne Chenney was written well.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Oct 3, 2018 22:19:34 GMT
The Big Short was garbage and this somehow looks worse, and Bale isn't convincing AT ALL in that trailer. Do you take pride in always taking the most idiotic & contrarian Armond White position on any film?? As much as I have utter contempt for EVERY opinion you've ever expressed, I gave you credit that I thought you were at least genuine in your opinions (i.e. genuinely ignorant), but I'm starting to think you're just a contrarian troll.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Oct 3, 2018 22:46:17 GMT
Bale isn't convincing AT ALL in that trailer. Just stop.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Oct 4, 2018 0:52:45 GMT
Bale isn't convincing AT ALL in that trailer. Just stop. Looked to me like Christian Bale in heavy makeup. Anyone that thinks he's embodying Cheney in that trailer is watching something different than what i saw.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Oct 4, 2018 0:54:45 GMT
Eh, this didn't really do much for me, as outstanding as the makeup work seems to be.
But then again, the Big Short trailer was a mess and I wound up really liking that one, so hopefully the same happens here.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Oct 4, 2018 1:28:02 GMT
The Big Short was garbage and this somehow looks worse, and Bale isn't convincing AT ALL in that trailer. Do you take pride in always taking the most idiotic & contrarian Armond White position on any film?? Not sure what you're referring to as I'm not the first person in this thread to raise doubts about this film or that joke of a trailer, or to dislike The Big Short for being convoluted, absurdly over-edited and directed, and grossly condescending. The movie received plenty of criticism on MA in 2015 for those and other reasons. But sure, I'm a contrarian troll. Arrogant twat.
|
|