|
Jamwad Hilder posted:Sure there are. They just all do the Marvel movies made for babies (I would too, for that kinda paycheck) and its hard to imagine them in a more serious/period piece type of role. Ain't no one going to see Captain America because of Chris Evans, just like no one went to Batman because Micheal Keaton was in it
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:42 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I don't know jack about acting, but there's gotta be some up and coming talent that could do it. Just have to find a director proud enough to take it as a challenge. There is one but his character is about to lead a galactic jihad across all humanity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
Star Man posted:There aren't any movie stars under the age of fifty, that's why. Jennifer Lawrence is 33 and Anya Taylor Joy and Timothee Chalamet are both 27 Star Man posted:Ain't no one going to see Captain America because of Chris Evans I'm a straight Cis dude and even I know that ain't true
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:
Go check how well his non Marvel movies have done. Movie stars as a driving force of popular culture are a dying breed. The whole industry has shifted towards IP, brand recognition is king, far more important than Director or the actors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:Go check how well his non Marvel movies have done. Movie stars as a driving force of popular culture are a dying breed. The whole industry has shifted towards IP, brand recognition is king, far more important than Director or the actors. That's partly true but the stars still play a major role in marketing the IP. People may be going to see Captain America not Chris Evans but a lot *more* of them go to see Captain America when he's Chris Evans and a lot fewer watch when Captain America is someone else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
I'm not a movie guy, so I don't really know anything for sure or what it means to "make a movie star" but I do know that people just don't talk about newer actors in newer movies the way they used to.Fuschia tude posted:I just watched U-571, and in Ebert's review of the film he complained that the submarine's crew all looked too young Killing people is serious business, and you want these people with these serious jobs to be making deep observations, and it's hard to get your head around the fact that most of the people doing this stuff are lovely young adults prone to finding depth in utter trash.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 16:22
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:That's partly true but the stars still play a major role in marketing the IP. People may be going to see Captain America not Chris Evans but a lot *more* of them go to see Captain America when he's Chris Evans and a lot fewer watch when Captain America is someone else. Here just watch this it will help people here understand what movie people mean by "movie star" its baby stuff but at least its coherent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQF82Kj-v0E&t=1367s
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
Sorry if this a jumble I've been writing this between work. My real issue with the age thing is it indicates a lack of care for the subject matter. If one is a fan of history and finds the Punic Wars interesting enough to make a movie about them, one would want to portray it as accurately as possible while still making a movie people want to see. So yes there are a bunch of caveats or compromises that have to be made, but Saving Private Ryan, or more topical to this thread, the Rome TV show, cared immensely about being historically authentic and accurate whenever possible. And as a result both of those are very good and also enjoyable to watch with someone not a giant history nerd. Or look at the difference between the LOTR movies and the recent TV show where there was a clear difference in amount of reverence for the source material. When one of the very first decisions made has the air of "eh gently caress it the dude was 26 but cast a geriatric man cause i like the actor" it does not bode well for the rest of the movie not taking lovely shortcuts, using lovely props, using bad CGI, etc. The attitude from minute one seems to be "only dorks on the internet will care about this." And while that might be true, that attitude leads to a piling on of decisions that end up creating stuff that even non-nerds notice and it means the whole thing falls apart. Like I had family and friends mocking the LOTR tv show for how bad some of the props and armor were, same happened to the witcher tv show with the horrendous nilfgaard armor. "only nerds will care" is ok to say a few times, but if that is your attitude going into a historical drama, that eventually creates a mess of laziness that negatively impacts the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Sorry if this a jumble I've been writing this between work. Genuinely, completely, no sympathy at all for this perspective. My opposition to the use of child actors is so absolute I would rather have 70 year olds playing 16 year olds than satiate a desire for accurate casting. Plus, the most artful and serious acting and show I've seen in the last 10 years was a showing of King Lear that did race blind casting. I'm utterly unsympathetic to a philosophy that would argue the show was bullshit because Edgar was white and Edmund was black.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
Also this isn't like some studio commissioned a biopic on Hannibal Barca and said to some assistant, "Go forth, then, and find for us an director, and an star that will profit us greatly". Fuqua brought this to a studio, probably with Denzel already attached, and the studio was like Hell Yes Extremely Successful Box Office Movie Director Antione Fuqua, lets make this loving movie. I wouldn't expect it to be an accurate retelling of that part of the Punic wars, it's probably going to be somewhere between Oliver Stone's Alexander and 300 as far as historical accuracy goes. But making huge historical epics is a big time gamble, some of the biggest flops in cinema history have been failed huge historical epics. Vin Diesel has been trying for 20 years to get a Hannibal movie/trilogy made and he can't get a studio to bite.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:01
|
|
|
Between this and the Bonaparte movie I’m just glad to see them making big historical epic type movies again, even they end up sucking. At least it’s not Marvel 37.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Between this and the Bonaparte movie I’m just glad to see them making big historical epic type movies again, even they end up sucking. At least it’s not Marvel 37. Agreed totally though based off the trailers the Napoleon movie looks like it's gonna be real bad
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Sorry if this a jumble I've been writing this between work. They're not making the movie to be a documentary. They are using the subject matter as a vehicle to make money. If Denzel Washington sells tickets, then for them it's a good choice. Nearly all historically-based movies are altered so as to make a better story and sell more tickets. That's reality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
70 year old Denzel plays thirty better than most thirty year olds. Hieronymous Alloy posted:That's partly true but the stars still play a major role in marketing the IP. People may be going to see Captain America not Chris Evans but a lot *more* of them go to see Captain America when he's Chris Evans and a lot fewer watch when Captain America is someone else. We've already seen how this plays out with Bond. People might prefer Dalton or Craig or whomever best as Bond, but that doesn't mean they like Craig as actor the best, they like Craig-Bond best. Chris Evans is entirely subservient to his role in the Marvel franchise and vice versa, but this also means that Evans can't get the hype and ticket sales to get real films made or push forward an unorthodox idea. When we had real stars we could pack a theatre house with just the allure of seeing Cruise, or Hanks or Julia Roberts. There were movies made that were practically nothing but playing stars off each other. The Color of Money is at it's core watching an old star and an up-and-coming star play off each other. Cruise's real life is a crucial part of some of his roles, Magnolia and Eyes Wide Shut do not work if Cruise and his rocky marriage and his strained relationship with his father aren't something the audience is aware of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:17
|
|
|
You aren’t going to get money to make a movie without a star In most cases
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Genuinely, completely, no sympathy at all for this perspective. My opposition to the use of child actors is so absolute I would rather have 70 year olds playing 16 year olds than satiate a desire for accurate casting. Plus, the most artful and serious acting and show I've seen in the last 10 years was a showing of King Lear that did race blind casting. I'm utterly unsympathetic to a philosophy that would argue the show was bullshit because Edgar was white and Edmund was black. Child actors are an entirely separate issue as the topic here is a 70 year old man playing a 26 year old man. Feel free to reference my point that compromises and caveats have to be made. King Lear is fiction not a historical work about a real person. I think you are referencing The Tragedy of Macbeth wherein Denzel was Macbeth and was fantastic. I have not argued about Denzel's race at all since in this case it does not matter one iota. Its the fact that he is of the age to play Lord Macbeth, not Malcom. Race would matter if one say, decided that Malcom X should be played by Chris Evans. Hannibal is a real person that really existed, and if your attitude at the start of a movie about that real person is to portray them wildly inaccurately, it does not bode well. In movies about real people, real issues factor in. In Hannibal's case, he is the young son of a now disgraced general with a bone to pick. His age and inexperience are absolutely a part of his success, and there is parallel to him in Scipio Africanus, the man who beat him, who was also a young upstart whose forward thinking brought him success. I don't think your opinion applies a film like Straight Outta Compton. Would that have been better if Denzel played Snoop? Or if they had like Chris Pratt play Jerry Heller? What about Malcom X, should they have used Morgan Freeman instead of Denzel?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
We don’t know what the story will be. I could be about young Hannibal but he did a lot after that . Also Denzel could be in framing scenes with other actors playing young Hannibal Your point re evans and Malcolm X is a good example
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:22
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:They're not making the movie to be a documentary. They are using the subject matter as a vehicle to make money. If Denzel Washington sells tickets, then for them it's a good choice. I want to see more rotting teeth and open, weeping wens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:22
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Agreed totally though based off the trailers the Napoleon movie looks like it's gonna be real bad Reading about Scott's thoughts on Napoleon is absolutely shattering to any hope one would have had. Dude fundamentally does not understand the man, the time period, or the forces working on the world at the time. Waterloo had some real bullshit Anglo propaganda but at least Napoleon in it is a human being. Wrong Scott died that's for sure. At least we'll always have the Gance film.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Between this and the Bonaparte movie I’m just glad to see them making big historical epic type movies again, even they end up sucking. At least it’s not Marvel 37. Yes, its cool they are making them. When they are dumb and bad and everyone does not go see them, they will go back to making Marvel # 38 My point is not that the age is the core problem, it is that it signifies where its going to go and often that ends poorly since audiences only tolerate so much before the move goes from being Gladiator, which whips rear end and did amazing in the box office, to Alexander which flopped horribly. euphronius posted:We don’t know what the story will be. I could be about young Hannibal but he did a lot after that . I mean the stuff he did afterwards is interesting but is also a much more history nerd niche than "dude that killed 60,000 Romans in one day." While this thread might eat up a dramatic showing of Scipio and Hannibal trading barbs in the Selucid court, that's not what the average moviegoer will want to see. WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Nov 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:24
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:. When we had real stars we could pack a theatre house with just the allure of seeing Cruise, or Hanks or Julia Roberts. There were movies made that were practically nothing but playing stars off each other. The Color of Money is at it's core watching an old star and an up-and-coming star play off each other. Cruise's real life is a crucial part of some of his roles, Magnolia and Eyes Wide Shut do not work if Cruise and his rocky marriage and his strained relationship with his father aren't something the audience is aware of. That's why I mentioned Jennifer Lawrence specifically: I was thinking of Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle. If we don't have any stars under fifty we don't have any female "stars" in that sense at all, and Jennifer Lawrence doesn't count, which is silly. I mean I know Hollywood thinks a 30 year old woman is equivalent to a sixty year old man but, still, point stands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Someone dig up Kubrick's dusty old bones and tell him to make that loving Napoleon epic he obsessed over for literal decades
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Someone dig up Kubrick's dusty old bones and tell him to make that loving Napoleon epic he obsessed over for literal decades It would've been glorious. But it's non existence did give us Barry Lyndon
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:35
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Someone dig up Kubrick's dusty old bones and tell him to make that loving Napoleon epic he obsessed over for literal decades Why did AI get made instead of this
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Barry Lyndon also directly inspired The Duelists, a much better Ridley Scott movie about Napoleon than this is going to be
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
I genuinely don't understand the appeal of napoleon as a topic for English language audiences. Don't we have enough lionization of dictators already? Maybe I've spent too many years reading Sharpe and Aubrey / Maturin. Like making a Cobra Commander movie
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I genuinely don't understand the appeal of napoleon as a topic for English language audiences. Don't we have enough lionization of dictators already? I don't know about the actual English but "middle class person bootstrapping their way to power and glory" is the American Wet Dream
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I genuinely don't understand the appeal of napoleon as a topic for English language audiences. Don't we have enough lionization of dictators already?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The children don’t know about Napoleon. Think of it as a wedge. Yeah, so many Looney Tunes jokes they can't understand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:I don't know about the actual English but "middle class person bootstrapping their way to power and glory" is the American Wet Dream It always turns out their magical secret was nepotism [Fake edit] quote:Napoleon was born on the island of Corsica into a family descending from Italian nobility. (Real edit) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Buonaparte#:~:text=Carlo%20Maria%20Buonaparte%20or%20Charles,and%20grandfather%20of%20Napoleon%20III. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Nov 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Yeah, so many Looney Tunes jokes they can't understand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:
I knew I would regret acting like you care about your arguments. Hieronymous Alloy posted:I genuinely don't understand the appeal of napoleon as a topic for English language audiences. Don't we have enough lionization of dictators already? Americans like Napoleon for a lot of reasons, not least being a perception that he was in some vague way 'on our side' during the early years of Independence, but TBH I think this is much less driven by some abstract holllywood algorithm and much more driven by "Ridley Scott wanted to make it and he can generally get to do what he wants."
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
Napoleon was a regional minor noble (or maybe just descended from nobility? Not sure if they actually had a title), that's basically middle class for the time.WoodrowSkillson posted:Child actors are an entirely separate issue as the topic here is a 70 year old man playing a 26 year old man. Feel free to reference my point that compromises and caveats have to be made. Hollywood does do young adult actors playing young people, just they don't like them for war and fightin', maybe for history in general? Racially, most people around the Mediterranean are going to be pretty dark-skinned anyways, definitely back in those days when so many would be outside more often than most people these days. I do wonder if there's any kind of african-nationalist movements about Carthage like there are with Cleopatra, trying to claim historical figures from Africa (the continent) as black (the racial identity from the American perspective), regardless to actual genealogical records or accounts of their appearance. Not that I really resent such movements all that much aside from them missing the real history. I think Assassin's Creed Origins had a really neat take going into the whole actual racial and religious divide between the ruling class of Macedonians/Greeks and the local majority Copts, and also depicting Cleopatra pandering to the local commoners despite being from the same stock as her brother.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It always turns out their magical secret was nepotism You might want to actually read up on Napoleon's life instead of skimming wikis. His nobility was basically on paper and nearly got him killed many times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It always turns out their magical secret was nepotism Yeah I was going to say, for some reason the fictional rewrites of his life story always make him into a commoner, I guess because people think rags-to-riches makes a better story, but he was a noble.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I knew I would regret acting like you care about your arguments. What is your point? You're the one that said everything I was talking about was wrong and cited fictional works and child actors
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Napoleon was a regional minor noble (or maybe just descended from nobility? Not sure if they actually had a title), that's basically middle class for the time. From loving Corsica though. This is by far the most insane part of Napoleon’s life story. For a decade this guy ruled half of Europe among and against its own divinely anointed crowned heads, when he was a semi-assimilated “notable” from an irrelevant island mostly known to other Europeans for poverty and crime. It’s completely baffling that it occurred. It’s like if the Galactic Emperor turned out to be from Scranton, PA. like yeah ok he had advantages that helped him get ahead in life and wasnt quite as inspiring and popular a rags to riches story as Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Enver Hoxha etc. All of whom he indirectly caused to happen by inspiring Hegel to write Phenomenology of Spirit, oops.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:You might want to actually read up on Napoleon's life instead of skimming wikis. His nobility was basically on paper and nearly got him killed many times. I've always thought the claim that Napoleon became the most powerful man in Europe in arguably centuries via nepotism to be a kind of profound misunderstanding of what nepotism is. If you want to say that Joseph Bonaparte became king of spain via nepotism, yes, that makes sense, but for Napoleon? Come on. There's a lot of ways to knock the guy but "got promoted to his position by his richer/more powerful relative" doesn't make a lot of sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:, that's basically middle class for the time. I suppose that's fair enough. It's just hard to see napoleon as a heroic rather than a villainous figure. I suppose the arc that makes sense is classical tragic hero doomed by hubris, etc. All the clips and trailers seemed like the focus was on his rise to power, which is just a weird flex to be making.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 04:42 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2023 18:29
|
|