Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 12, 2021 19:16:48 GMT
Is there anyway you can stop being like this? This is why you were banned from AwardsWorthy (yeah, I know you just made up another account and joined again, because Trolls gonna Troll )Again, you have made your point. You can stop now. Everyone will thank you Stop being the reasonable guy that tells the truth and doesn't make up shit? No, I don't think I'll stop being like that. Not sure what you think bringing up my AwardsWatch ban is going to achieve I was banned at least 5 times on IMDb, so it's not like me being banned from a forum is breaking news (especially here). Yes, I was banned on AwardWatch. Glad you got that off your chest. Now could you stop acting like a baby in a tantrum so we can get back to the topic, which is Being the Ricardos? Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jun 12, 2021 19:17:07 GMT
Never realized until right now that despite Sorkin being an awards name and his scripts being so dialogue-heavy, no actor has won an Oscar yet for one of his scripts.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 12, 2021 19:25:14 GMT
Never realized until right now that despite Sorkin being an awards name and his scripts being so dialogue-heavy, no actor has won an Oscar yet for one of his scripts. While Sorkin is one of the best dialogue-writers (so much so that Sorkin Dialogue is a standard phrase you hear in scriptwriter circles and movie academia), his characters tend to lack the warmth that endears them to awards voters. It's probably why the actors that play his characters regularly win critics awards but don't do quite as well with the industry awards. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think any of the actors he has written for has managed any individual industry award (Oscar, BAFTA, Globe, SAG) except for Winslet.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 12, 2021 19:26:15 GMT
Never realized until right now that despite Sorkin being an awards name and his scripts being so dialogue-heavy, no actor has won an Oscar yet for one of his scripts. Lots of nods though. I think wins come down to the level of competition in any particular year and the "narratives" abound. Jack Nicholson for A Few Good Men might have been capable of a win, but he had 2 Oscars already and equally legendary competition in Hackman and Pacino.I guess Winslet was close to another win with Steve Jobs.Lot of of performances nominated from his scripts are nomination worthy, but not neccesarily demanding of a win. I mean, does Brad Pitt really need an Oscar for Moneyball?
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 4,772
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jun 12, 2021 20:34:00 GMT
I'm amazed this thread hasn't been locked yet.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jun 12, 2021 20:39:06 GMT
All valid points. I don't see De Armas as a factor to win. Michelle Williams has already recently been nominated for playing Monroe, and even with the accent factor, a sexy actress playing another sexy actress might not seem like a big enough challenge to award the big prize. I see her as a nomination threat at most, and again, she'll have to overcome the same role being recently nominated. Stewart may have to deal with comparisons to Emma Corrin, who just won the drama Golden Globe for playing Diana in The Crown and is a real threat to win the Emmy. So she has things she needs to overcome as well. Some people may think if we've already just seen a perfect Diana on one of the most popular TV shows in the world, why should we be bowled over by Stewart? I can't see Hudson winning another Oscar for another role where she is playing a singer. And it felt like an admission of weakness to push back the release of Respect because of the similarities to Viola Davis in Ma Rainy's Black Bottom and Andra Day in The United States Vs Billie Holiday. Another thing that stops me viewing it as a potential winner. Not to mention Cynthia Erivo being in contention for TV awards this year for the same role. Hudson has a lot going against her. Most of the contenders you mention have their pluses and minuses, even if their performances "deliver". Kidman is at least helped enormously by Aaron Sorkin, who is an Academy favorite, and is coming right off the back of The Trial Of The Chicago 7. Plus, she is comfortably the most respected actress in this bunch. She would have an "overdue for a 2nd Oscar" narrative to work with, alongside the "I can't believe she pulled it off" narrative. It's all speculation for now, but Lead Actress definitely seems like it'll be a fun and interesting competition All valid points. Everyone is going to have their pluses and minuses. I don’t think that Williams already being nominated for portraying Marilyn Monroe will necessarily be a negative because that was ten years ago, and her film wasn’t regarded that well overall. Even if de Armas isn’t in contention to win I still expect critics to prefer Blonde more than My Week With Marilyn. The fact that Blonde is supposed to have things that might not appeal to audiences who want a traditional biopic will probably hurt de Armas the most. As for The Crown and Emma Corrin, I did think it could potentially hurt Stewart, and it still might, but John Lithgow won awards for portraying Winston Churchill and then the following year, Oldman still swept the televised awards. So it could go either way, but I think if Stewart nails the role, she’ll definitely have the “omg I didn’t think Bella Swan could act” reaction from the general public as most of them aren’t familiar with her smaller films where she did win over big critics. I never thought that Renee Zellweger would sweep so easily after being out of the public eye for so long even if she was playing Judy Garland or that Sylvester Stallone would become a favorite to win after years of collecting Razzies, so even Hudson could be back even though I doubt her chances too. Still money talks, and while I think Respect looks bad, it should do well at the box office. Finally unfortunately Erivo’s film was already released, and generated no buzz whatsoever so I don’t think that will be a problem for Hudson. As for Sorkin, I think his projects are almost always going to have Oscar potential, but even last year The Trial of the Chicago 7 went home empty handed despite being one of the early front runners for Best Picture and the directors branch didn’t even nominate him. It seems like it should be a high priority for Amazon probably their main push, but Amazon can sometimes have bad Oscar years. Like last year was great for them as was 2016, but in between this years, it feels like they’ve had a lot of bait that they gave up on very early (The Aeronauts, Beautiful Boy), or had projects that got a few nominations but maybe could have got more like The Big Sick. Also I don’t know what the MGM merger will do to Amazon’s award slate or vice versa.
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 346
|
Post by wattsnew on Jun 12, 2021 23:19:23 GMT
A film as boring as this one is going to be do does not deserve such an entertaining thread!
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on Jun 13, 2021 2:30:25 GMT
I’m going with Stewart here. My only reservation is that while she is a good actress, I don’t really see her as a transformative one, so it’s possible that she doesn’t deliver in the role.
I doubt the Emma Corrin thing won’t be an issue, though. It wasn’t for Oldman when Lithgow swept for his Churchill portrayal, I don’t see why it would be here.
It’s probably the most baity role in contention and expectations will be fairly low for her. She’s squarely within the common age range for Best Actress winners and has been on the cusp of an Oscar breakthrough for a while now, so I can the stars aligning. I have no doubt that the film will be well received.
I also think Margot Robbie would be a threat under normal circumstances, DOR will surely write a juicy role for her. I’m just not sure how the film is going to fare under the scrutiny DOR is surely going to be under during award season.
I’m not feeling Kidman here, even for a nomination. I still think she’s miscast and the set pictures look silly. I think at best it’s going to be in the Respect/Tammy Faye realm of middling bait with solid to good performance that could be filler noms.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 13, 2021 2:46:44 GMT
I'm actually pretty high on Chastain after seeing the Tammy Faye trailer. She's an actress that's promised a lot and delivered very little since her breakthrough year in 2011, but she looks more dialled in than I've seen her in years in that trailer. What holds me back on predicting her as the winner is the "dark comedy/satire" vibe the trailer gives off, and those always seem to struggle to win Best Actress gold with Oscar (Margot Robbie in I,Tonya, Carey Mulligan in Promising Young Woman etc), even if Film Twitter thinks they should win. It's early days though. The movie could bomb and the performance might not be as good as I think it appears in the trailer.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 13, 2021 11:53:49 GMT
I mean, to be fair, what is Tony Hale supposed to say? He's a co-star who wants people to see his movie. He has a vested interest. Yeah, he may be impressed in the moment with her, and maybe she is really great . . . but it's all going to be how it translates through to the screen. And I think Best Actress is set to be an absolute bloodbath this year. - Lady Gaga may not be playing someone nearly as well known as all the other Best Actress possibilities who are playing real life people, but I think there’s a lot of doubt there which is fair. She looks the part, but there’s a lot of concern that maybe A Star Is Born was a fluke because she was playing a pop singer and sang for a lot of it. Then there was that video of her with the accent that got mocked, so if she pulls it off it could be huge for her especially as she’s not exactly in the same lane as the other possible Best Actress nominees playing real life people because of how her character is more infamous that famous among other things. I've said this before but her role is potentially (if it's good!) - a groundbreaking role for a female pop music singer too - she doesn't sing here, she's acting opposite 3 Oscar winners, 5 nominees total, she has an accent, she narrates her film, that's a lot of heavy lifting......I mean what did Tony Hale say about Nicole Kidman that is more impressive than what Hayek said about Gaga - below - if you can believe either I mean. Gaga's whole picture's success is dependent on her both artistically and commercially in a way the others really aren't since her movie's commercial upside seems so very high - like you said is not a flattering bio-pic the way the others are and it is not predisposed to an audiences expectations the way all the others are - ..........if her picture works (big if) - she's going to get a lot of the praise that goes along with this kind of stuff. She has the role which has that "oh you just gotta see it!" angle to it more it seems to me ...... Working with Gaga sounded perfect, too.
“She is incredibly talented, incredibly smart. And she has on top of all that, extra abilities that not every brilliant actor has, which is she’s good with the accent,” Hayek says. “Of course, she has an amazing ear. She is extraordinary improvising, and not everybody has that. She really embodies the character. Her level of commitment — I’ve only seen maybe once or twice somebody commit to a character like she does. And she’s also a great team player.”
variety.com/2021/film/news/salma-hayek-lady-gaga-house-of-gucci-ridley-scott-1234977571/
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 13, 2021 19:01:52 GMT
- Lady Gaga may not be playing someone nearly as well known as all the other Best Actress possibilities who are playing real life people, but I think there’s a lot of doubt there which is fair. She looks the part, but there’s a lot of concern that maybe A Star Is Born was a fluke because she was playing a pop singer and sang for a lot of it. Then there was that video of her with the accent that got mocked, so if she pulls it off it could be huge for her especially as she’s not exactly in the same lane as the other possible Best Actress nominees playing real life people because of how her character is more infamous that famous among other things. I've said this before but her role is potentially (if it's good!) - a groundbreaking role for a female pop music singer too - she doesn't sing here, she's acting opposite 3 Oscar winners, 5 nominees total, she has an accent, she narrates her film, that's a lot of heavy lifting......I mean what did Tony Hale say about Nicole Kidman that is more impressive than what Hayek said about Gaga - below - if you can believe either I mean. Gaga's whole picture's success is dependent on her both artistically and commercially in a way the others really aren't since her movie's commercial upside seems so very high - like you said is not a flattering bio-pic the way the others are and it is not predisposed to an audiences expectations the way all the others are - ..........if her picture works (big if) - she's going to get a lot of the praise that goes along with this kind of stuff. She has the role which has that "oh you just gotta see it!" angle to it more it seems to me ...... Working with Gaga sounded perfect, too.
“She is incredibly talented, incredibly smart. And she has on top of all that, extra abilities that not every brilliant actor has, which is she’s good with the accent,” Hayek says. “Of course, she has an amazing ear. She is extraordinary improvising, and not everybody has that. She really embodies the character. Her level of commitment — I’ve only seen maybe once or twice somebody commit to a character like she does. And she’s also a great team player.”
variety.com/2021/film/news/salma-hayek-lady-gaga-house-of-gucci-ridley-scott-1234977571/If she nails it, I think she's the frontrunner. It's too good of a character.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 13, 2021 19:11:45 GMT
I've said this before but her role is potentially (if it's good!) - a groundbreaking role for a female pop music singer too - she doesn't sing here, she's acting opposite 3 Oscar winners, 5 nominees total, she has an accent, she narrates her film, that's a lot of heavy lifting......I mean what did Tony Hale say about Nicole Kidman that is more impressive than what Hayek said about Gaga - below - if you can believe either I mean. Gaga's whole picture's success is dependent on her both artistically and commercially in a way the others really aren't since her movie's commercial upside seems so very high - like you said is not a flattering bio-pic the way the others are and it is not predisposed to an audiences expectations the way all the others are - ..........if her picture works (big if) - she's going to get a lot of the praise that goes along with this kind of stuff. She has the role which has that "oh you just gotta see it!" angle to it more it seems to me ...... Working with Gaga sounded perfect, too.
“She is incredibly talented, incredibly smart. And she has on top of all that, extra abilities that not every brilliant actor has, which is she’s good with the accent,” Hayek says. “Of course, she has an amazing ear. She is extraordinary improvising, and not everybody has that. She really embodies the character. Her level of commitment — I’ve only seen maybe once or twice somebody commit to a character like she does. And she’s also a great team player.”
variety.com/2021/film/news/salma-hayek-lady-gaga-house-of-gucci-ridley-scott-1234977571/If she nails it, I think she's the frontrunner. It's too good of a character. She's definitely a contender, given the scale and nature of the project, but let's get real for a second. She is not under the same pressure or expectation to bring a globally known icon to life like Kidman or Stewart, despite also playing a real life character . If either of those two nail it (in terms of critical reception), they can Judy their way to a win
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jun 13, 2021 19:45:18 GMT
If she nails it, I think she's the frontrunner. It's too good of a character. She's definitely a contender, given the scale and nature of the project, but let's get real for a second. She is not under the same pressure or expectation to bring a globally known icon to life like Kidman or Stewart, despite also playing a real life character . If either of those two nail it (in terms of critical reception), they can Judy their way to a win There was a lot more that went into Zellweger's win than just playing Judy Garland. There was the comeback narrative as well as the extremely thin competition of legitimate contenders. Kidman, de Armas, Stewart and Hudson are all playing real-life and extremely recognizable icons (Gaga too also has the historical personage element, but not to the same recognizable degree), but as we saw this most recent season, simply playing a real-life character with a juicy role isn't enough on its own. People thought Andra Day and Viola Davis were going to have the edge based off of playing historical figures with baity material, and they couldn't clinch it in the end.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 13, 2021 20:12:26 GMT
If she nails it, I think she's the frontrunner. It's too good of a character. She's definitely a contender, given the scale and nature of the project, but let's get real for a second. She is not under the same pressure or expectation to bring a globally known icon to life like Kidman or Stewart, despite also playing a real life character . If either of those two nail it (in terms of critical reception), they can Judy their way to a win Stewart will not be the first time someone played Princess Diana. Stewart will have to really sell she's Princess Di because she looks nothing like her and I'm not sure if she can even capture of essence. There's no sparkle. As for Kidman, well, it depends I guess. Lucy is an icon and I think it will depend on if Nicole can capture her charm. Judy's story was tragic so Renee had a lot to work with. Since they're are a lot of biopics this year, maybe it will come down to the actress in the bp nominee.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 13, 2021 21:12:20 GMT
She's definitely a contender, given the scale and nature of the project, but let's get real for a second. She is not under the same pressure or expectation to bring a globally known icon to life like Kidman or Stewart, despite also playing a real life character . If either of those two nail it (in terms of critical reception), they can Judy their way to a win There was a lot more that went into Zellweger's win than just playing Judy Garland. There was the comeback narrative as well as the extremely thin competition of legitimate contenders. Kidman, de Armas, Stewart and Hudson are all playing real-life and extremely recognizable icons (Gaga too also has the historical personage element, but not to the same recognizable degree), but as we saw this most recent season, simply playing a real-life character with a juicy role isn't enough on its own. People thought Andra Day and Viola Davis were going to have the edge based off of playing historical figures with baity material, and they couldn't clinch it in the end. Most people had no idea who Ma Rainey was before seeing the movie. She was a historical figure, but not one in the public consciousness. Davis was considered a strong bet because her performance was transformational, she is hugely respected within the industry (and maybe seen as due for a lead Oscar) and August Wilson is now a thing in awards season. Being a historical figure was one of the least important factors in her specific case as a potential winner. It was in fact, an afterthought. She might as well have been a fictional character. Day was always hampered by being a complete newcomer to the acting industry, even though her character was more baity and recognisable as a major historical figure. Plus her film itself was really panned. Two huge drawbacks that can't be ignored, that several of the iconic biopic characters/performances this year can easily overcome. No one in the upcoming field is a complete newcomer for a start, so that is already an advantage over Day. I'd say an established actress in a critically praised film could probably have won playing Billie Holiday, where Day couldn't.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 13, 2021 21:20:10 GMT
She's definitely a contender, given the scale and nature of the project, but let's get real for a second. She is not under the same pressure or expectation to bring a globally known icon to life like Kidman or Stewart, despite also playing a real life character . If either of those two nail it (in terms of critical reception), they can Judy their way to a win Since they're are a lot of biopics this year, maybe it will come down to the actress in the bp nominee. I'd probably agree with this. The more AMPAS like your movie, the more likely they are to vote for the performance.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 13, 2021 21:55:34 GMT
Since they're are a lot of biopics this year, maybe it will come down to the actress in the bp nominee. I'd probably agree with this. The more AMPAS like your movie, the more likely they are to vote for the performance. You have a better shot of them watching your movie.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jun 13, 2021 23:01:43 GMT
- Lady Gaga may not be playing someone nearly as well known as all the other Best Actress possibilities who are playing real life people, but I think there’s a lot of doubt there which is fair. She looks the part, but there’s a lot of concern that maybe A Star Is Born was a fluke because she was playing a pop singer and sang for a lot of it. Then there was that video of her with the accent that got mocked, so if she pulls it off it could be huge for her especially as she’s not exactly in the same lane as the other possible Best Actress nominees playing real life people because of how her character is more infamous that famous among other things. I've said this before but her role is potentially (if it's good!) - a groundbreaking role for a female pop music singer too - she doesn't sing here, she's acting opposite 3 Oscar winners, 5 nominees total, she has an accent, she narrates her film, that's a lot of heavy lifting......I mean what did Tony Hale say about Nicole Kidman that is more impressive than what Hayek said about Gaga - below - if you can believe either I mean. Gaga's whole picture's success is dependent on her both artistically and commercially in a way the others really aren't since her movie's commercial upside seems so very high - like you said is not a flattering bio-pic the way the others are and it is not predisposed to an audiences expectations the way all the others are - ..........if her picture works (big if) - she's going to get a lot of the praise that goes along with this kind of stuff. She has the role which has that "oh you just gotta see it!" angle to it more it seems to me ...... Working with Gaga sounded perfect, too.
“She is incredibly talented, incredibly smart. And she has on top of all that, extra abilities that not every brilliant actor has, which is she’s good with the accent,” Hayek says. “Of course, she has an amazing ear. She is extraordinary improvising, and not everybody has that. She really embodies the character. Her level of commitment — I’ve only seen maybe once or twice somebody commit to a character like she does. And she’s also a great team player.”
variety.com/2021/film/news/salma-hayek-lady-gaga-house-of-gucci-ridley-scott-1234977571/I definitely agree about the commercial part being very big for Lady Gaga, and assuming House of Gucci does well she might be the only possible Best Actress nominee where most of the commercial success can be attributed to her. Adam Driver has his fans too, but he’s nowhere as big a star as Gaga is. Jennifer Lawrence and Margot Robbie are starring with male costars who are also huge proven box office draws. Sandra Bullock’s film is on Netflix, so I’m not sure we’ll get an accurate representation of its numbers unless it really is successful which is certainly possible, but so far I’ve only heard buzz about Don’t Look Up, The Power of the Dog, and Blonde. So her film is a unknown entity for me right now. Maybe it will be like The Two Popes and be a huge crowdpleaser, or maybe it will go the way of something like The Starling which I thought was going to be huge, not that it can’t, but then Netflix sits on it forever and no news about it being one of their films they’re taking to the festivals. Further even if Kristen Stewart nails Princess Diana, I imagine Spencer is going to be like Jackie and not really be accessible for the general audience. It might be a hit on an independent scale, but it’s most likely not going to do blockbuster numbers that House of Gucci could. Same with Blonde except Netflix. Respect could do very big numbers, but I would view it as the same way Bohemian Rhapsody was huge. People may know Jennifer Hudson and Rami Malek, but they’re mostly not the reasons people flock to see BR or Respect. The Eyes of Tammy Faye could do well, but I’m not sure younger people know who Tammy Faye Bakker was, and with In the Heights not being able to draw in young people, that could be a problem with two Marvel properties sandwiching it, and a James Wan film opening right before it too. Older audiences might flock to it, but this past weekend has me doubting whether theaters are fully back or if it’s just for known IPs because most of the audience that is comfortable going back is skewing younger. That does make sense to me because I think in general young people aren’t as worried about getting COVID, and older people even if they’ve been vaccinated may still not feel comfortable yet. Not to mention in red states where older people don’t care about the vaccine, they’re unlikely to be the audience that wants to go see most of the fall award films. Cry Macho and Respect probably will, but a film about LGBTQ icon Tammy Faye, heh I just don’t see it especially since it seems like Jerry Falwell comes off badly just from the trailer. Lucille Ball is certainly an icon, and I could see that being something that attracts people in the flyover states too. So I could also see the success of Being the Ricardos as being attributed to Nicole Kidman in a similar way that HoG’s could be to Lady Gaga, but I still think HoG could be bigger, not that it will be but could be, just because I think if Gaga nails it not only will her fans go but those that were curious if she could do it will go see it. Plus young people may not know who she’s playing, but they’ve heard of Gucci, whereas sadly I wouldn’t be surprised if most of them have never heard of a Lucille Ball. I’ve also read that she’s got a ton of music things coming up plus she’s probably going to do something huge for the Met Ball again, so she could be a relentless promotional machine during awards season.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jul 27, 2021 1:35:04 GMT
Gold Derby confirms another contender bites the dust (at least for this year which I think is probably good for Being the Ricardos because I think this could have done well over the holidays, but if people still aren’t going to the movies like they did pre-COVID, it could easily get lost). Or maybe MsMovieStar is working her voodoo again.
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Jul 27, 2021 2:18:41 GMT
Gold Derby confirms another contender bites the dust (at least for this year which I think is probably good for Being the Ricardos because I think this could have done well over the holidays, but if people still aren’t going to the movies like they did pre-COVID, it could easily get lost). Or maybe MsMovieStar is working her voodoo again. I always thought the plan for this was 2022 anyway.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jul 27, 2021 2:23:21 GMT
Reminder: Lady Gaga was a theatre kid and started acting at a young age. Of course that's not saying much but still she took lessons.
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Jul 27, 2021 12:34:41 GMT
Gold Derby confirms another contender bites the dust (at least for this year which I think is probably good for Being the Ricardos because I think this could have done well over the holidays, but if people still aren’t going to the movies like they did pre-COVID, it could easily get lost). Or maybe MsMovieStar is working her voodoo again.
Oh honey, I haven't had to on this one as Nicole's fully fillered fright face has been doing it for me. Here's Javier having a good laugh at it.
I can't say I haven't been enjoying the hilarious comments and backlash on the english Daily Mail site every the filming of this movie is promoted. They've stopped promoting it now. Sorkin must be nervous it seems to be going the same way as Harvey's Disgrace of Monaco. I hope Nicole's been working with a voice coach because Lucy wasn't the breathy, whispering type.
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Aug 4, 2021 14:25:58 GMT
So turns out this might actually be coming out this year after all.
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 346
|
Post by wattsnew on Aug 18, 2021 22:46:05 GMT
This isn’t a good look for them.
The article also mentions Kidman will be playing Ball in flashbacks when she was in her 20’s. LOL, good luck with making that work.
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Aug 18, 2021 23:19:05 GMT
Nice little clickbait tweet there.
The actual article is titled 'Lucille Ball’s Daughter Says Nicole Kidman ‘Astounding’ in Sorkin’s Being the Ricardos', and spends most of the interview praising the film. Yes, she mentions there are some scenes that are inaccurate, but she recognises that sometimes creative licenses are taken. This really isn't a big deal and isn't going to hurt the movie at all.
|
|