Just how overrated is Dicaprio ? and his parallels with Chris Nolan

Just because I'm a silly ole sheep. CR.

Back to DiCaprio, I hope aron can put down his passion for a bit and enjoy the experience of watching some fine acting from some absolutely brilliant actors, not just Leo, that his generation has produced. Smacking people over the head in disagreement is time wasting. It's aalso pretty bloody rude. I should know because I sure used to do a hell of a lot of it.

Can I PM you too, Citizen?
=*(




oh and Dani. Like Jinx from Space Camp.

__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you." - Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy." - Captain Steel

"I just can't get pass sticking a finger up a dog's butt." - John Dumbear

Hm. Watching that video now, decades later, I am kinda creeped out a bit by how that kid is handling Jinx. That was NOT the connection that I was trying to make. Only the "Friends... for....eh....verrrrrr." bit.

...y long time? Lil Bit?

Is that what I waz missing, Y/N?

Brilliant lil actor!!! And brilliant adult actor for sure.

WTH?

I never said that...I said that when actors try to be brands ....they have to smooth out the rough edges...aka not take risks

ROFLMAO! yOU'RE ADORABLE!!!

nOT SORRY FOR YELLING.

well..considerable amount of people who matter in making money for movie thinks so...all the views and comments on you tube don't mean nothing to me but the moment those translate to boxoffice receipts then its a considerable thing...i heard some people above respond saying "why do you care what others like"..but its more of a curiousity to herd mentality and our lack self control in separating adrenaline rush or thrill from actors in those movies taking risk. He may have one of the best filmography but not actor.

thanks mom

Box office receipts in no way demonstrate what you're saying, and it's not even really clear why you think they do.

Most of what you're saying is not actually evidence for your position, which is still made up pretty much entirely of uncharitable speculation.

Uh, i said that in response to this post:

Sure doesn't sound like it's a curiousity, sounds like you really care whether the movies you like are popular or not. Kinda like herd mentality almost.

That's OK, I guess.

I thought you knew better why box office receipts matter and demonstrate my point. Actors value depends on the type of box office they have.Rock has a certain type of boxoffice appeal...if you take rock and make a movie like revenant it wont work...artsy big budget movies are not rocks arena...his fans wont like watching him in artsy movies. But with Dicaprio its artsy/ambitious/epic type of box office appeal....people wouldnt like if DiCaprio made a fast and furious or rampage type movie...or atleast his fans would be disappointed with generic action movies. But the common through line through his movies is the cool/badassness of his character...you like following his character around and not hate him. So if Chris Nolan is making something like Inception his choice of actors tends to be more serious and atrsy kind of actors and less trashy/dumb blockbuster actors...Nolan doesnt want inception to feel like a fast and furious movie..so he wants to avoid connection as much as possible and that involves not casting actors who do those kinds of movies...i think its Sidney poitier's advice to Denzel Washington - "the first 3-4 you do determine the kind of career you have". There are charts in hollywood studios with lists of actors and states and countries an actor is popular in. That's how deep their research goes.Movies rarely get greenlit if they defy these pre existing statistics.

Thats why Bale is lacking in the prestige big budget movies department because his fanabase is mainly batman fans and not auteur fanboys...terminator salvation was a smart choice(thought the movie sucked) in terms of box office because his fanbase overlaps with terminator fanbase. Its hard for bale to make a movie like wolf of wallstreet and make 200+ million overseas because his fans are skewed to comic book movies. Dicaprio however has overlapped fans with Quentin tarantino , Oscar movies fans , Scorsese fans, Nolan fans..thats a pretty good crowd that would show up to his movies at december.

I am surprised you dont know this simple point.

Leo is not overrated.

He's one of the 10 best actors of all time in my opinion.

__________________
“Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are, it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!” ~ Rocky Balboa

I am surprised you think that point has anything to do with an actor's skill at his/her craft, instead of just marketing and financing. These issues are not inextricably linked from an artistic point of view.

__________________

This is all true (and obvious), but it has absolutely no relationship to the point you were ostensibly making. You're giving me an explanation as to why box office matters for the purposes of getting movies made, but you cited box office receipts it in response to this:

"His movies have made a lot of money" in no way supports the claim "people think he's the greatest ever."

This is what I call the dark knight phenomenon..I looked it up recently...when it came out the movie made to the top of imdb list in just a few days release and people thought the movie was well liked but in reality it was being voted by fanboys and godfather has been voted 1 as well. So for people born after 2005 he is the greatest actor because of the surrounding effect...its hard for a 50 yr old person to call the departed the greatest movie ever but for a 15 yr old its easy to call it the greatest movie ever because for him the cursing and the hot guys screaming and hitting each other and the macho feel to the movie feels like a great movie. If an actor puts out movies like the departed with lot of macho feel + oscar quality 4 or 5 times he automatically becomes their favourite actor.

It has to do with peoples lack of separating actor from the movie....people automatically assume that a decent serviceable performance in a great movie is great performance...great example is Natalie Portman in black swan. For example Jonah hill has given the same performance in True Story and money ball but he got oscar nomination for the later.

Jonah hill gave similar performance in Superbad/The sitter/22 jump street and wolf of wallstreet and you get oscar nomination for the later. Compare that with something like Ben kingsley in sexy beast or christian bale in the fighter..those performances elevate the material..same with the big short christian bale..its not the same performance he gave in other movies.

To put it more clearly. 1) Box office star power in prestige movies gives you freedom to make similar kind of movies(aka prestige big budget movies) that get oscars attention.2) Even though you give a performance in it that is same as performance in a normal sub-par movie...the very fact that your performance is in a great movie gets you awards attention and trick people into thinking the performance is great.

Its not the strength of the performance but the strength of direction and script that makes people think performance is great. Dicaprios performance in great gatsby is same as his performance in revolutionary road..but since one is a better movie it got nominated for some awards.

Okay, but you're explaining your theory, not why the thing you mentioned (high box office receipts) serves as evidence of your claim (people say DiCaprio is the greatest). Here's the part where you make the leap of logic:

This may or may not be true (I say probably not, but whatever), but the relevant fact is that this is speculation. This is your interpretation of what box office receipts mean and a claim that people are tricked, not an established fact or some direct logical consequence of them. So when that interpretation is questioned, you can't point back to those receipts as if they were evidence of same.

Simple example is Sylvester stallone for creed...everyone thought he should win and he was even nominated for it . But if you look at half other stallone movies..its the same performance. Think of matt damon..his performance in the martian is same as his performance in half a dozen other movies but he is nominated for the martian. I dont believe its just a theory..above performances are proof..i value what the actor brings to the table distinct from his earlier performances..Matt Damon could have played the astronaut as someone who has suffered a serious injury in the accident and has to carry that injury throught out the movie...instead of just playing it normal..thats what i call actor doing something different..same with Leo but just instead of matt damon playing himself..Leo plays himself but just with more screaming and shouting.

Let's analyze all the leaps in logic in that post:

1) Simply saying Stallone's performances are interchangeable is not "proof" that they are. It's not even evidence that they are.

2) Even if that were proof, it wouldn't be proof that every other performance you think is interchangeable also is (IE: DiCaprio's).

3) Even if that were proof, AND somehow proved DiCaprio did the same thing, it still wouldn't be proof that people were rating him as the greatest ever at all, let alone because they were tricked by box office receipts.

Theories do not become evidence (let alone proof!) just because they're technically consistent with the observed facts, nor does speculation cease to be speculation just because it's sorta plausible sounding.