I've now seen both the Aviator & Million Dollar Baby - Oscars were correct

The Aviator is NOT Raging Bull, hell it wasn't even Goodfellas. I mean, it was a good movie and Cate Blanchett was impressive as Katherine Hepburn. But if Martin Scorsese had won the Oscar it would have only been a pity Oscar for not winning with his previous nominated movies that should have won especially Goodfellas (which was 110% better than "Dances with a movie so boring it's stronger than the most powerful sleeping pill". I've never seen Ordinary People so I don't have an opinion if Raging Bull should have won over that movie.

Clint Eastwood just pulled at your soul directing "Million Dollar Baby" and it deserved every academy award it won. "The Aviator" was a good movie, a little long at times (which was also my same opinion of "The Gangs of New York" and "Age of Innocence") but did not deserve the Oscar this year, but without a doubt NOT the best movie of the bunch.

BTW, Leonardo was fabulous as the reclusive and somewhat crazy Howard Hughes and if there was no "Ray" this year, I think Leonardo would have won the Oscar for best actor. However good Leo was, Jamie Foxx was ever so much more!

so I'm glad that Clint won the prize too. I don't even think that Aviator should have been up for the nomination.

maybe he is. Aging can only help him...or me get over this bias I have about him. I thought he was absurdly cast in Titanic, and looked goofy in that modern Romeo and Juliet movie...up till now he's always looked so teenaged, and kind of soft, I've always been aware of him, well, acting. But I'll keep what you said in mind. It's kind of like Prince in the 80s, I always thought of him as kind of an ooky exhibitionist and never thought more about him, then a friend pointed out how talented he was...

He is a fine, fine actor. But I agree with what you're saying.
Sometimes, with men, their looks get in the way of their acting. IMO Brad Pitt has a similar (but not as severe) problem. He really is a solid actor but his pretty pretty looks get in the way.

With actresses, if they're not pretty they don't even get a part, so they don't have to deal with that. :silly:

--he did that young stud cowboy thing in such a goofy way he was instantly likeable. Plus I guess I liked his looks, so I was happy to just gaze at him whether I was judging his acting or not, LOL! The one time his looks made me nervous, though, was how Rbt Redford shot him, and lighted him, in A River Runs Through It. It made me feel that Redford was thinking of his own young good-looking self all the while...ick.

DiCaprio is a fine actor, and getting better with age. He was fantastic in his character in the Aviator (it was just the movie as a whole that sucked).

...knowning that he played ages ranged from 25 - almost 50. He really seemed like Howard Hughes, which is how I judge a good actor from a hack. He had the accent and the peculiarities of Hughes down pat. It's a shame because he was up against Jamie Foxx who just happened to do it better as Ray Charles.

When most of it is mimicry.

At least Leo and Cate had to do the inside work themselves, but IIRC, Jamie Foxx had the luxury of sitting next to Ray, calling Ray up and asking questions if he needed to...

I'm happy for Jamie and Cate, but I'm a little frowny about it too.

..you to be that person. If you don't pull it off then people think you're just some dumb actor trying to be someone else.

And Jamie only had some use of Ray Charles - remember Charles passed away last year.

Other great biopic I thought was Ali - Will Smith did a great job of playing "The Greatest"

People want you to be the guy/girl, they don't want to be impressed with your interpretation of events, etc. They want you to be like the film footage and the interviews.

I don't know...I'm not saying that there's no talent involved, I'm not saying it's not hard... just seems that making up a person is more difficult than just imitating one.

Cate Blanchett was AMAZING as Katherine Hepburn. I saw it with a good friend who is a Hepburn fanatic, and even she was blown away.

quality. He has always been a very good actor. Beginning with, "This . Boys Life," "Basketball Diaries," and '...Gilbert Grape.'

Leo excels in films where you can see a character's change in direction based upon his experiences. You get to see him get into a character and how he allows that character to evolve. Jack in Titantic was a one dimensional character. People who never watched Leo in a movie prior to "Titantic" have mistakenly judged his actiing ability on that one movie. I've bee following him since '92 or '93. I saw a star quality and was blown away from the very beginning. The first time I laid my eyes on him I said, that boy is gonna be a superstar.

Are YOU:shrug: talkin' to ME?:evilgrin:

Baby, Finding Neverland, Sideways and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (which was robbed of a Best Pic nom IMHO). I would rank Million Dollar Baby behind the other three I saw. The acting was good, the writing was good, the directing was good, but I didn't think anything in particular was that spectacular. Hillary Swank was much better in Boys Don't Cry, or maybe it was just a better role. And I love Morgan Freeman in just about anything (I thought he was the best part of the film) but it didn't rock my clock that much.

Maybe it was because I had the ending ruined for me, and I know I'm in the minority, but I thought it was far from the best picture of the year. I actually thought it was pretty cheesy and predictable to have ...

***(SPOILER ALERT, READ NO FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW) Maggie's injury caused by a dirty boxer. It cheapens the film for me. Because the reality of boxing is that it's dangerous and you can do everything right and still get injured. (/SPOILER)***




Eternal Sunshine was far more inventive and interesting. The acting was phenomenal, the writing was just outstanding and I was so pleased to see Jim Carrey actually be good. I normally hate his comic stuff, but I'm finding more and more that comedians play sad characters very well. He was absolutely heart-breaking.

Finding Neverland was brilliant, and not just because Johnny Depp was incandescently beautiful. It actually made me appreciate the story of Peter Pan (a story I've always found a bit tiresome) because you see it from Barrie's eyes. It's not about boys who never grow up (something that women don't find charming at all), it's far more complex and wonderful than that.

And lastly, Sideways. It was quirky and imperfect and downright disturbing at times. But there a few scenes (especially the last one) that are so brilliant that overall I still find it more interesting.

or for that matter "Ray"

The problem with Eternal Sunshine was they released it way back in the beginning of the year, which makes folks forget about the movie come Oscar time. Personally, Jim Carrey should have received an Oscar nomination for his performance.

The first 10 minutes were the best acting I've ever seen from him.
I thought the movie was great too.

around. I have enjoyed his films since I was a little kid.
I think he does a terrific job.
He is probably the most imitated man in American cinema, but the most often butchered---other attempts by lesser actors to do 'Dirty Harry' type characters and such always end in failure.