|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 10, 2024 20:01:32 GMT
Is the main issue the lack of A-list directors shooting entire seasons themselves? Would Denzel/Leo/Pitt/etc. do it if Spielberg/QT/Scorsese/etc. were directing every episode à la The Knick or Twin Peaks: The Return?
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 10, 2024 20:12:53 GMT
Is the main issue the lack of A-list directors shooting entire seasons themselves? Would Denzel/Leo/Pitt/etc. do it if Spielberg/QT/Scorsese/etc. were directing every episode à la The Knick or Twin Peaks: The Return? Blanchett is a better actor than all 3 of those guys and she does it all the time...........although this time it is with Cuaron.........  |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 10, 2024 20:29:50 GMT
Is the main issue the lack of A-list directors shooting entire seasons themselves? Would Denzel/Leo/Pitt/etc. do it if Spielberg/QT/Scorsese/etc. were directing every episode à la The Knick or Twin Peaks: The Return? and she does it all the time...........although this time it is with Cuaron......... She's too lacking in basic elemental faculties to measure up to those guys at their best. Denzel and Leo wipe the floor with her, but even Pitt in Moneyball, for instance, can make her praxis look silly; her work in Blue Jasmine is pantomime in comparison. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 10, 2024 20:33:28 GMT
Blanchett is a better actor than all 3 of those guys and she does it all the time...........although this time it is with Cuaron......... She's too lacking in basic elemental faculties to measure up to those guys at their best. Denzel and Leo wipe the floor with her, but even Pitt in Moneyball, for instance, can make her praxis look silly; her work in Blue Jasmine is pantomime in comparison. This is crazy talk tbh to me............. like batshit crazy.......it's like saying the remake of Oldboy is better than the original or bad mouthing PTA.........um, disregard  |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 10, 2024 20:49:18 GMT
She's too lacking in basic elemental faculties to measure up to those guys at their best. Denzel and Leo wipe the floor with her, but even Pitt in Moneyball, for instance, can make her praxis look silly; her work in Blue Jasmine is pantomime in comparison. This is crazy talk tbh to me............. like batshit crazy.......it's like saying the remake of Oldboy is better than the original or bad mouthing PTA.........um, disregard Okay, regardless of what you think about those actors, what do you think it would take for them to do TV? Blanchett generally does so many supporting and small parts in film that I don't think we really mentally lump her in the A-list category with people who are/were making $15m a picture. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 10, 2024 21:12:29 GMT
This is crazy talk tbh to me............. like batshit crazy.......it's like saying the remake of Oldboy is better than the original or bad mouthing PTA.........um, disregard Okay, regardless of what you think about those actors, what do you think it would take for them to do TV? Blanchett generally does so many supporting and small parts in film that I don't think we really mentally lump her in the A-list category with people who are/were making $15m a picture. It has to be either a slam dunk piece (Angels in Amerca or something lke that)......or ambition. Washington did like 7 years on TV so he may think......nah.......that was the advice Poitier gave him - don't let people see you act for free - or he may have the ambiton to win the Triple Crown.......he couid and would imo easily do something like an August Wilson play for HBO.......he's still protecting his brand but he's approachng 70 ........most of the previous generatons went to Prestige TV in their 60s........if Hanks would, he would I bet and vice versa Pitt maybe if something was perfect.......but DiCap ihas 10 years to play with ..........maybe 20 ....... don't see it atm tbh ..... |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 10, 2024 22:07:36 GMT
What's the incentive for them? Unless they are desperate for an Emmy, which I don't sense any of them are. They are all still A-list movie stars. They get the best offers and work with the best filmmakers.
More major female stars do TV because the shelf-life of a female A-lister in movies is more precarious. You can hit the wrong side of 40, and suddenly the phone stops ringing the way it used to and the roles start getting smaller and less interesting. The roles for women are better on TV. More female A-listers are planning ahead for that eventuality ( even younger ones like Emma Stone). Denzel is nearly 70, and there is no sign that his stardom is in any sort of decline. He's cashing in on his iconic stature and getting movies made he's wanted to do for decades ( like Hannibal). He's still a leading man. He can afford to give away potentially Oscar winning roles away to friends and peers like Samuel L Jackson in The Piano Lesson ( he runs the August Wilson library. He could have given Jackson's role to himself if he wanted to). All Denzel cares about is film and stage. Simply put, he doesn't need to do TV, and he doesn't appear to have any interest in winning an Emmy.
Same deal with Leo, Pitt and Cruise .
|
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 10, 2024 22:17:19 GMT
What's the incentive for them? Unless they are desperate for an Emmy, which I don't sense any of them are. They are all still A-list movie stars. They get the best offers and work with the best filmmakers. More major female stars do TV because the shelf-life of a female A-lister in movies is more precarious. You can hit the wrong side of 40, and suddenly the phone stops ringing the way it used to and the roles start getting smaller and less interesting. The roles for women are better on TV. More female A-listers are planning ahead for that eventuality ( even younger ones like Emma Stone). Denzel is nearly 70, and there is no sign that his stardom is in any sort of decline. He's cashing in on his iconic stature and getting movies made he's wanted to do for decades ( like Hannibal). He's still a leading man. He can afford to give away potentially Oscar winning roles away to friends and peers like Samuel L Jackson in The Piano Lesson ( he runs the August Wilson library. He could have given Jackson's role to himself if he wanted to). Simply put, he doesn't need to do TV, and he doesn't appear to have any interest in winning an Emmy. Same deal with Leo, Pitt and Cruise.I guess the issue is, I don't see TV as inherently inferior. I'd rather do The Knick or The Bear than Licorice Pizza. I don't think film is in a healthy enough place to disregard the artistic possibilities on TV, even with access to the best opportunities in film. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 10, 2024 22:26:08 GMT
What's the incentive for them? Unless they are desperate for an Emmy, which I don't sense any of them are. They are all still A-list movie stars. They get the best offers and work with the best filmmakers. More major female stars do TV because the shelf-life of a female A-lister in movies is more precarious. You can hit the wrong side of 40, and suddenly the phone stops ringing the way it used to and the roles start getting smaller and less interesting. The roles for women are better on TV. More female A-listers are planning ahead for that eventuality ( even younger ones like Emma Stone). Denzel is nearly 70, and there is no sign that his stardom is in any sort of decline. He's cashing in on his iconic stature and getting movies made he's wanted to do for decades ( like Hannibal). He's still a leading man. He can afford to give away potentially Oscar winning roles away to friends and peers like Samuel L Jackson in The Piano Lesson ( he runs the August Wilson library. He could have given Jackson's role to himself if he wanted to). Simply put, he doesn't need to do TV, and he doesn't appear to have any interest in winning an Emmy. Same deal with Leo, Pitt and Cruise.I guess the issue is, I don't see TV as inherently inferior. I'd rather do The Knick or The Bear than Licorice Pizza. I don't think film is in a healthy enough place to disregard the artistic possibilities on TV, even with access to the best opportunities in film. I can't speak for the likes of Leo, Pitt and Cruise (because they don't do theatre) ....but Denzel has stage when he really wants to challenge himself beyond the confines of screen acting. He's also old school and came from an era where TV was considered inferior or seen as where actors go when there career is on the downslide. That's obviously not neccesarily true these days, but you can't blame a 70 year old man for sticking to his ways, especially as those ways have worked perfectly for him. He did his time on TV for nearly a decade in the 80's with St Elsewhere, and I think he saw it as just a way to put food on the table for his family and always wanted to get out of TV. And by 80's standards, St Elsewhere was actually considered "prestige television". |
|
