As for Oppenheimer , I just can't see that winning. I downloaded the sound track 2 days ago. It was half decent to play but the movie itself was streaming 10 days after it was released to theaters
Killers Of The Flower Moon
- Thread starter Steve williams
- Start date
Oops, Bradley Cooper indeed. Thanks for the correction.
Regarding DeNiro and DiCaprio, it is my understanding that actors above the Marquis are generally considered for a leading role nomination and not a supporting role nomination. But I do think there have been exceptions. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
I agree, but there is a huge swath of voters and faans (I am not one of them) who resent that Nolan did not win the Director Oscar for Dunkirk or the other 4 nominations he received but did not win for Picture or Screenplay (Momento, Inception and Dunkirk). I don't think Nolan or Gerwig's work was near the equal of Scorcese's in Flowers but as you know, the Academy is often more of a popularity contest than a talent contest, and unfortunately, I think Gerwig is the Academy's "it" girl this year. At the WBF, politics is verboten, but in Hollywood, you almost get penalized if you don't flaunt it!
I also thought Sound of Freedom was a terrific movie. Oppenheimer to me was overhyped and way too long. The script to that movie must have been as thick as a Manhattan telephone directory
Killers of the flower moon is a so so movie. Too long. It can be cut down to 2.5 hours without affecting the story. is It based on a true story? King Hale needed to kill the 5 sisters and their mother to get the money? Quite a stupid plan in my opinion.
Split the movie over two days (and I read the book before). Great movie, but the third act really drags. Checked my watch and the Bureau didn’t come in until 2 hrs with 90 mins to go. I thought the courtroom cameos weren’t necessary. The book is all of 260 pages that was used for the story.
Haven’t seen Poor Things with Emma Stone, but Lily Gladstone was outstanding. Her character had a lot of nuance which is really hard to do. Facial expressions just as powerful as words. She didn’t have the typical 2 minute “overacted Oscar moment” which was refreshing.
Leo was good, not great. DeNiro will be up against Downey Jr for supporting actor. Tough call!
Haven’t seen Poor Things with Emma Stone, but Lily Gladstone was outstanding. Her character had a lot of nuance which is really hard to do. Facial expressions just as powerful as words. She didn’t have the typical 2 minute “overacted Oscar moment” which was refreshing.
Leo was good, not great. DeNiro will be up against Downey Jr for supporting actor. Tough call!
I really enjoyed the movie, we also split it over two nights. I thought Leo was fantastic, as usual, and DeNiro was the best I’d seen him in years.
If criminals were smart they’d earn money honestly. That’s why I loved the Sopranos, they accurately depicted the mobsters and morons.
It remains for me the best picture of the year with Leo and DeNiro best actor and best supporting and Scorsese getting Best Director. The enigma will be if both Leo and DeNiro are nominated for Best Actor
I thought the ending was terrific and unexpected. I never once looked at my watch. We saw it in the theater.
I thought the ending was terrific and unexpected. I never once looked at my watch. We saw it in the theater.
I can’t disagree. I loved both actors. Couldn’t stand Oppenheimer but I have always liked anything in which Paul Giamatti stars The only thing by Cilian Murphy I disliked was Red Eye and that was because he was so evil. He was just as evil in Peaky Blinders which is one of my favorite series. So I can’t disagree with your thought. Leo has won. Giamatti has been nominated but never won. I would have no problem with either It’s just that I disliked Oppenheimer as there was so much narrative and so little action. But that’s just me. Does any one know what sort of prosthetic they used in Giamatti’s eye
Similar threads
