State your unpopular film related opinion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 27

I mean, you can say what you will about those directors, but they have a very distinct feel and look to their films, you could say they have a certain vision that shines through all of their films, for better or worse.

 

I'd call it less of a vision than a specific set of tastes and preferences that never really coheres into anything singular or fully-formed, at least in the case of Snyder or Bay.

But that's being nit-picky. I agree that all of their movies don't feel anonymous or something cooked up by an executive committee. On some level, you can appreciate that no one else could have made their movies; they're certainly distinctive. The 'visionary' tag that a lot of directors are labelled with is a result of the marketing teams embellishing that.

 

I'm a fan of a lot of these director's films and I agree that they often have that distinct look, that said my point was that maybe not everyone is Fritz Langt:

Pretty much yeah, good explanation.

 

Haha! From the "visionary" director of "transcendent" movies like...

 

-I don't get the hate for Miles Teller.

 

He's a decent actor, and he's done a lot of award worthy work. I think nerds just have a thing for dudes that remind them of themselves. Him and Eisenberg I have heard have "punchable" faces, when in fact these are geeks themselves saying it. Self hate, haha.

 

Maybe also Michael Cera who is a pretty decent actor too.

 

Yeah I hear that a lot in online film communities.
"He has a punchable face" or "I only liked Whiplash cuz he got slapped a lot" which is just textbook keyboard tough guy spiel.
or
"He's a frat *****e" which is funny cuz the guy went to art school and was in band.

I did hear something on SchmoesKnows podcast where one of the guest said that she thinks that Teller will "Alex Pettyfer himself out of a career"

Idk the kid maybe a *****e (that Esquire interview didnt help) but he's been good in everything Ive seen him in. Comedy or drama.

And frankly anything Ive heard reported about him is better than putting directors in headlocks or mailing used condoms to cast members, which are things that seem to get a pass.

 

Is that supposed to be unpopular?

 

What's your question? I'm just saying that Cera seems to be unpopular these days and I think he is a very good actor with great comedic timing.

 

I liked AoU better than TA.

 

I don't get it either.

What score do you give AoU?

 

I agree

 

I don't like that Jesse Eisenberg plays practically the same character every time. Nervous, jittery, fast-talking characters.

 

They pay him to play that, that's the thing. When Hollywood pigeonholes you, going out of that zone can be dangerous.

 

Either a 7.5 or 8. I don't recall exactly.

 

Miles is a pretty good actor. That esquire interview seemed like BS to me since it was written to paint him in a bad light from the beginning. He could be a *****e for all I know but I don't think that interview is very valid.

 

This is true...if this were the '40s. Nowadays, it's very much the opposite. Hollywood appreciates actors with range a lot more than actors without it in today's industry. Typecasting is still a thing, but odds are it's the actors or actresses decision to go that way, since it's what they're good at and what a lot of their audience expects of them. But in today's mass produced movies/television shows, and the rise of indie and indie like films, an actor can find range easily.

 

I don't think it's as easy as you're imagining. Sometimes the only roles actors get offered, at least in bigger budget films, are ones that suit the style their known for. It can be difficult to find a role in a box office film outside of that when the highest paying job offers are all "Stuttery nerd" or "Grizzled police officer".

It's Hollywood, we're not talking a hugely progressive industry here.

 

That's where the rise of lower budget indie films come in, as I said at the end of that post. It's very easy for an actor to find roles in lower budget films or TV series that show and develop their range. They may not get a variety of different roles in blockbusters (though it can lead to that), but actors are often praised and expected to have a certain degree of range due to how the industry is now. It's a a far, far cry from where Hollywood was in the '30s-50s, where an actor was expecting to act in a single role and once that was found, pretty much never branched out due to lack of opportunity.

I mean, yeah, if you limit yourself to only big budget blockbusters to the point, maybe, but that's self-limiting and pointless since the industry has evolved to a point where there is more out there than before.

 

I agree, which is why I focused on bigger budget films. I think you're giving them a little too much credit talking about the 1930s-1950s though. The age of big name actors doing smaller films, TV shows, etc, didn't really kick off (at least in a big way) until, I'd say, as late at the 2000s.

 

I think it's slowly been building since the '60s, but I would agree that it probably didn't hit that peak until the late '90s or '00s.

 

I think Zack Snyder might actually deserve the visionary director tag, I mean he had a vision for MOS and he stuck with it for BvS. Also by now he has his distinct visual signature style.

 

I don't know if this is unpopular or not, but the music in Ant-Man is every bit as important as anything else in that film. It really helps to build up every scene, much like in any other classic movie. I love that soundtrack.

 

Agreed. Alot of people like the soundtrack I think but it's still underrated. I loved that it gets a callback in CW.