doodle
New Member
Posts: 221 
Likes: 29
|
Post by doodle on Mar 3, 2017 13:34:17 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people predicting him for best actor which doesn't make much sense considering how his character is clearly supporting in the book. CMBYN is told from Elio's POV. Not just that but based on the movie reviews I've seen, Hammer's performance isn't that much to go nuts about compared to Chalamet. Even Michael Stuhlbarg is getting more buzz than him yet Armie Hammer is mainly what all the prediction lists out there can talk about when it comes to this film. I don't get it. I get Hammer's time is overdue but this should be done right.
Does anyone actually see Armie Hammer getting nominated next year for this movie? And if so, for what category? Lead/Supporting? I see Timothee Chalamet possibly getting nominated but if does it has to be Lead Actor. I wouldn't be surprised if Stuhlbarg squeezes through either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allenism on Mar 3, 2017 14:03:43 GMT
Barring Carol/Ordinary People-type category fraud, I think Chalamet will be pushed in the Lead category which historically has not been generous to actors under 30. That being said, I just can't see Hammer getting in without him. If early reviews are anything to go by, it's really Chalamet's film. Stuhlbarg probaly has a decent shot in Supporting as well, but I also don't see both him and Hammer making it in.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Mar 4, 2017 9:53:49 GMT
Its a supporting role by all means.
But then in lead he would have more chances than Timothee because of his star status which is a shame.
Having said this, Hammer did not reinvent acting but it was a great performance nevertheless. I am not sure yet if I prefer him or Stuhlbarg but Hammer definitely deserves to be put into serious consideration. He totally acted against type in many ways.
|
|
doodle
New Member
Posts: 221
Likes: 29
|
Post by doodle on Mar 4, 2017 23:36:13 GMT
Its a supporting role by all means. But then in lead he would have more chances than Timothee because of his star status which is a shame. Having said this, Hammer did not reinvent acting but it was a great performance nevertheless. I am not sure yet if I prefer him or Stuhlbarg but Hammer definitely deserves to be put into serious consideration. He totally acted against type in many ways. Was Hammer better than Chalamet? |
|
|
|
Post by bob-coppola on Mar 5, 2017 0:27:07 GMT
Well, Mara went supporting for Carol. Campaign over logic, I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Mar 5, 2017 9:15:34 GMT
Its a supporting role by all means. But then in lead he would have more chances than Timothee because of his star status which is a shame. Having said this, Hammer did not reinvent acting but it was a great performance nevertheless. I am not sure yet if I prefer him or Stuhlbarg but Hammer definitely deserves to be put into serious consideration. He totally acted against type in many ways. Was Hammer better than Chalamet? No. Chalamet was just unbelievably good. Its for sure Hammer's best performance tho. |
|
doodle
New Member
Posts: 221
Likes: 29
|
Post by doodle on Mar 12, 2017 8:02:21 GMT
Was Hammer better than Chalamet? No. Chalamet was just unbelievably good. Its for sure Hammer's best performance tho. I'm halfway through the book and I know from looking online that the peach scene is in. However, I'm curious, did they cut the toilet scene? The story's eroticism comes off different in the book but I fear if they try to put this scene on screen it'll just be laughable and cringeworthy. It's actually the only part of the book I do not like for obvious reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Mar 12, 2017 13:47:30 GMT
No. Chalamet was just unbelievably good. Its for sure Hammer's best performance tho. I'm halfway through the book and I know from looking online that the peach scene is in. However, I'm curious, did they cut the toilet scene? The story's eroticism comes off different in the book but I fear if they try to put this scene on screen it'll just be laughable and cringeworthy. It's actually the only part of the book I do not like for obvious reasons. I haven't read the book, what toilet scene are you referring to? There is a toilet scene in the film |
|
doodle
New Member
Posts: 221
Likes: 29
|
Post by doodle on Mar 12, 2017 15:05:31 GMT
I'm halfway through the book and I know from looking online that the peach scene is in. However, I'm curious, did they cut the toilet scene? The story's eroticism comes off different in the book but I fear if they try to put this scene on screen it'll just be laughable and cringeworthy. It's actually the only part of the book I do not like for obvious reasons. I haven't read the book, what toilet scene are you referring to? There is a toilet scene in the film There is a part in the book when they go to Rome and they watch each other go to the bathroom. I'm hoping it's not in. |
|
|
|
Post by alexanderblanchett on Mar 12, 2017 16:15:26 GMT
I haven't read the book, what toilet scene are you referring to? There is a toilet scene in the film There is a part in the book when they go to Rome and they watch each other go to the bathroom. I'm hoping it's not in. I don't remember that scene ;-) |
|
