|
Post by iheartamyadams on May 13, 2019 13:41:45 GMT
If you told me ten years ago that Dakota Fanning would have zero votes on a poll like this. smh
Ronan is the obvious answer here, I think.
I’ll throw a bone to Stewart as well. I’ve seen all of her 2019 films already and she’s crushing it lately. Surprisingly hilarious in Charlie’s Angels.
|
|
LaraQ
Badass
English Rose
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 2,844
|
Post by LaraQ on May 13, 2019 13:57:48 GMT
If you told me ten years ago that Dakota Fanning would have zero votes on a poll like this. smh Ronan is the obvious answer here, I think. I’ll throw a bone to Stewart as well. I’ve seen all of her 2019 films already and she’s crushing it lately. Surprisingly hilarious in Charlie’s Angels. Dakota's having a strange career,she's more talented than her Sister imo but Elle is the one who gets all the buzz and most of the roles.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 13, 2019 14:30:45 GMT
I don't think Lawrence is the most talented at all. She's had the most opportunity, but I think it's been a very mixed bag. She's been repeatedly miscast (particularly in some of the David O'Russell films, playing women who are clearly supposed to be older). Watching her pretend to be some mature woman in American Hustle, when she still obviously reads as 22 years old or whatever is jarring. You just wonder why isn't another actress more suitable playing this role? It's playing dress-up. So there have been quite a few false notes in her work, even though she was often rewarded for it, in the industry's bizarre attempt to pass her off as some cross between Julia Roberts and Meryl Streep. I don't find the young adult stuff in Hunger Games to be that impressive a challenge, and think many of the names on that poll could have done the role justice to the same degree(ie Hailee Steinfeld). Her Oscar winning role in Silver Linings Playbook didn't have much degree of difficulty either. It was basically a Rom-Com role. Her multiple performances across the X-Men franchise have been poor enough that people consider the former swimsuit model to have previously played Mystique to be vastly superior in the role. Lawrence is a good actress, with a fair amount of charisma in certain roles. But she was never anywhere as good or gifted as the industry wanted her to be. She basically had the same hype machine behind her as Gwyneth Paltrow did in the mid to late 90's. Paltrow was another attractive young actress shoehorned as the "chosen one" and given the most opportunities for a few years, but it soon became apparent that while good, some of her peer group were significantly better. She was grossly miscast and somehow made it work in the eyes of critics, audiences, ect which I think is a true test of someone’s ability. She very nearly won consecutive Oscars and won the most critic awards for Hustle. She also received standout reviews of the cast. An opinion like yours is the exception, not the consensus on that perf. Also, reducing her SLP work to a “rom com” performance lol. I could say the same about Zellwegger in BJD, Roberts in Pretty Woman and would be doing a major disservice to amazing star turns. That’s a very basic and lazy criticism that people accept only because the genre usually sucks. And Renee Zellweger won an Oscar for Cold Mountain, one of the most embarrassing performances I've ever seen take home major awards. And I'll take that opinion to my grave.Sometimes critics, audiences etc are wrong or not critical enough in hindsight. Life is not about being a lemming....I've never been afraid to call something out even if it goes against popular or consensus opinion at the time. I've been proven right on some occasions. Awards season in particular can cause snap judgements, because the beast has to be fed. Roberts and Zellweger were very good, and deserving of their nods. But they didn't win Oscars did they. Lawrence's SLP peformance is hideously overrated because she actually managed to convert a role Katherine Heigel could likely play just as well into an actual lead actress win. I'd have little issue if it was just a nomination for Lawrence. It gave credence to the opinion that that horny old dudes in the Academy had a habit of giving out Oscars to really hot young actresses they wouldn't mind banging. It was an ingenue award, imho. It is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on May 13, 2019 14:33:39 GMT
If you told me ten years ago that Dakota Fanning would have zero votes on a poll like this. smh Ronan is the obvious answer here, I think. I’ll throw a bone to Stewart as well. I’ve seen all of her 2019 films already and she’s crushing it lately. Surprisingly hilarious in Charlie’s Angels. Dakota's having a strange career,she's more talented than her Sister imo but Elle is the one who gets all the buzz and most of the roles. Dakota Fanning has the “difficult rep” gawker.com/5062622/dakota-fanning-a-diva-from-hell-claims-her-latest-directorHe slammed her as a disaster on set, said she was frequently jealous of her co-stars, refused to come out of her trailer if her scenes weren’t filmed first and even said they had to cut around her performance because the performance didn’t ring true lol. There’s been stuff out there about her along those lines for a while. I believe it. She is (was?) a phenomenal talent, but if people don’t want to work with you, your career will suffer as a result. The Hollywood role was a pretty big coup for her, though. Perhaps it provides a career boost if she delivers.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on May 13, 2019 15:37:23 GMT
She was grossly miscast and somehow made it work in the eyes of critics, audiences, ect which I think is a true test of someone’s ability. She very nearly won consecutive Oscars and won the most critic awards for Hustle. She also received standout reviews of the cast. An opinion like yours is the exception, not the consensus on that perf. Also, reducing her SLP work to a “rom com” performance lol. I could say the same about Zellwegger in BJD, Roberts in Pretty Woman and would be doing a major disservice to amazing star turns. That’s a very basic and lazy criticism that people accept only because the genre usually sucks. And Renee Zellweger won an Oscar for Cold Mountain, one of the most embarrassing performances I've ever seen take home major awards. And I'll take that opinion to my grave.Sometimes critics, audiences etc are wrong or not critical enough in hindsight. Life is not about being a lemming....I've never been afraid to call something out even if it goes against popular or consensus opinion at the time. I've been proven right on some occasions. Awards season in particular can cause snap judgements, because the beast has to be fed. Roberts and Zellweger were very good, and deserving of their nods. But they didn't win Oscars did they. Lawrence's SLP peformance is hideously overrated because she actually managed to convert a role Katherine Heigel could likely play just as well into an actual lead actress win. I'd have little issue if it was just a nomination for Lawrence. It gave credence to the opinion that that horny old dudes in the Academy had a habit of giving out Oscars to really hot young actresses they wouldn't mind banging. It was an ingenue award, imho. It is what it is. I think the reason why it worked for the massses is because she was physically miscast, but being brash, sassy, ect are things that she’s done prior to great success. It’s within her wheelhouse as a performer. And I don’t think the character being 40 years old was important to the story at all. Age the character down a bit and the story/film is basically the same. Being physically miscast and also not being a good fit for the persona of a character is typically a bit more of a fatale blow. As for SLP, she got lucky that it was an unusually thin year for the category. Julia Roberts probably would’ve won too in a similar circumstance. Winning or only being nominated usually has little to do with the performance and more on the competition or lack thereof in the year they’re competing.
|
|
hilderic
Junior Member
Posts: 309
Likes: 133
|
Post by hilderic on May 13, 2019 16:22:37 GMT
That's what science says. For instance, 2000 is the last year of the last millennium, not the first of the 3rd one. This has nothing to do with science, but with the fact that the Christian calendar era we use lacks a year 0. This means that, technically speaking, its first decade was AD 1 to AD 10, and the others followed accordingly. In practical terms, however, the first decade is usually made to last just nine years (AD 1 to AD 9), the second decade runs AD 10 to AD 19, the third decade AD 20 to AD 29, and so forth. Film-wise, few people would be opposed to calling Rebecca a 1940s film or All about Eve a 1950s film.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,726
Likes: 2,136
|
Post by cherry68 on May 13, 2019 18:31:50 GMT
That's what science says. For instance, 2000 is the last year of the last millennium, not the first of the 3rd one. This has nothing to do with science, but with the fact that the Christian calendar era we use lacks a year 0. This means that, technically speaking, its first decade was AD 1 to AD 10, and the others followed accordingly. In practical terms, however, the first decade is usually made to last just nine years (AD 1 to AD 9), the second decade runs AD 10 to AD 19, the third decade AD 20 to AD 29, and so forth. Film-wise, few people would be opposed to calling Rebecca a 1940s film or All about Eve a 1950s film. Practical? Just wrong, sorry. The fact many people make that mistake doesn't make it right. Anyway, if you want to say "actresses born 1990 - 1999", it's ok for me. I still suspect Robbie is older though.
|
|