The Revenant's only flaw

Tools    





Example of a civil claim to kick off a discussion:
"DiCaprio didn't seem grizzled enough to play a survivalist."
Things you actually said:
"puny 15-yr-old-girl looking actor who can't act to save his life"
"I cannot take that girly boy seriously"
You deliberately chose to phrase a controversial opinion in a way that would provoke a strong response. And both statements carry implications about sex and culture that, right or wrong, are also fair game. christine's response on this point was civil and substantive and tackled those implications (and with them, the entire complaint) with intelligence and civility, though you brushed it off (and seemed confused both about who said it and what they said) almost immediately, despite your ostensible desire for debate.

And really, what kind of "debate" do you expect? Even your example above is just a flat contradiction. There's no real opportunity for debate with something like this. When someone says some highly admired thing is "overrated" and loads their description of it with incendiary pejoratives, they're not really looking for discussion.
I understand what you're saying ... strong words provoked strong responses. Ok.

But, I feel I'm permitted (and so is everyone else) to strongly critique an actor/movie. I want to point out an important distinction: critiquing an actor (kind of the point of this site) vs attacking someone else on this site (not ok). I didn't attack other members in my OP, and not anywhere else, either, at least not until people had had their share of hurling personal insults at me.

What happened essentially was: I attacked an actor. People took it personally and attacked me. And, you're saying that's ok, right ? By attacking an actor, I'm laying out the carpet for people to attack *me* (vs attacking *my opinion*). Because attacking an actor is the same as attacking them ? Wow ... that makes perfect sense

I guess we're not getting anywhere with this particular debate. I'll just have to ignore personal attacks in the future ... that's the lesson learned. I guess popular (unquestioned) opinion will prevail, after all.

I think I've said more than what I wanted to say about this subject. I get how it works here. I think I'll just move on to the next thread now.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
^lol. smart arse
I cannot deny, ynwtf.

I'm still trying to figure out what a 'girly boy' is in red piller lingo. If this is a girly boy then I'm Taras Bulba.




I know that LDC is someone the movie business considers a great actor ... that doesn't mean I'm going to blindly accept him as such. I have my own independent thoughts from watching him on-screen and evaluating him. And, to me, he's a joke. To me, he belongs on the cover of GQ magazine, and not on the movie screen.
Those of us who respect DiCaprio as an actor have independent thoughts too. We've formed our opinions from watching and evaluating his on-screen performances.

I've seen 23 of DiCaprio's films. I haven't liked every single one of them, but I've liked him in all of them. I think he's a tremendous talent with a lot of range and I've bought him in every one of those roles, including The Revenant.

I think your suggestions of "manlier" men to play the part are rather ridiculous. Others have already pointed out that a thinner physique makes sense for someone living the lifestyle that Hugh Glass led. But one thing that also needs to be noted is that DiCaprio was playing a real person. From what information I can find about Hugh Glass, he was about 40 years old at the time of the bear mauling, so it wouldn't make any sense to me to cast someone in their 50s or 60s, like Russell Crowe and Liam Neeson.



Those of us who respect DiCaprio as an actor have independent thoughts too. We've formed our opinions from watching and evaluating his on-screen performances.

I've seen 23 of DiCaprio's films. I haven't liked every single one of them, but I've liked him in all of them. I think he's a tremendous talent with a lot of range and I've bought him in every one of those roles, including The Revenant.

I think your suggestions of "manlier" men to play the part are rather ridiculous. Others have already pointed out that a thinner physique makes sense for someone living the lifestyle that Hugh Glass led. But one thing that also needs to be noted is that DiCaprio was playing a real person. From what information I can find about Hugh Glass, he was about 40 years old at the time of the bear mauling, so it wouldn't make any sense to me to cast someone in their 50s or 60s, like Russell Crowe and Liam Neeson.
If you read my comment about Liam N carefully, I did mention "if he were twenty years younger"

Alas, the past cannot be changed. Liam N is in his 60s and The Revenant will have to be immortalized with LDC in it, instead ... sigh



That elusive hide-and-seek cow is at it again
*edit*
crap! you people are suddenly all in a hurry to start replying to each other lol. this was supposed to fall right after @Dani8 !

*post-edit ...edit*
DAMNIT! Ok. well. Dani8 already caught it and replied so $%!$^!. I'm not deleting this. i've already committed....

-----

lol ...i think?





You can't win an argument just by being right!
If you read my comment about Liam N carefully, I did mention "if he were twenty years younger"

Alas, the past cannot be changed. Liam N is in his 60s and The Revenant will have to be immortalized with LDC in it, instead ... sigh
Macho Comacho, you don't like the actor. No one had a problem with that. You seem to be having a lost in translation moment.



If you read my comment about Liam N carefully, I did mention "if he were twenty years younger"

Alas, the past cannot be changed. Liam N is in his 60s and The Revenant will have to be immortalized with LDC in it, instead ... sigh
I like how you conveniently ignore the fact that Russell Crowe is also too old for the part.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
lol ...i think?



I'm disturbingly amused *cough* I mean I'm faux offended. Andrew Leigh looks like a flaming metrosexual, like Christian Bale in American Psycho or Mads Mikkelsen in Hannibal. Too much product in their bathroom cabinets.



I like how you conveniently ignore the fact that Russell Crowe is also too old for the part.
I didn't realize he's in his 50s ... thought he was in his 40s

Nothing a little make up can't fix I wouldn't let a few years difference get in the way of getting the right fit for the role.

P.S. I don't think LDC was the only actor in his 40s available when the film was made. I'm pretty sure Matt Damon is in his 40s, and I would have cast him instead, if age were so important. Anyone better than LDC, and I think plenty of people match that description in my opinion.




movies can be okay...
Leo Dic !!!!!!!
__________________
"A film has to be a dialogue, not a monologue — a dialogue to provoke in the viewer his own thoughts, his own feelings. And if a film is a dialogue, then it’s a good film; if it’s not a dialogue, it’s a bad film."
- Michael "Gloomy Old Fart" Haneke



You can't win an argument just by being right!
big burly hugs to all around?


I think I need to go play girly girl weekend warrior and wake up my neighbours with the leaf blower.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
I like how you conveniently ignore the fact that Russell Crowe is also too old for the part.
He's also a bit rotund. I dont think a lil pony could gallop with him on it's back.



Leo Dic !!!!!!!
That was just me being lazy. I didn't stop to realize that DiC sounds like ...

LDC is my new abbreviation.



I didn't realize he's in his 50s ... thought he was in his 40s

Nothing a little make up can't fix
Okay... Did you think he was in his 20s when he did Gladiator 17 years ago?

Besides his age, Crowe doesn't have the star power and respect he once had and certainly nowhere near as much as DiCaprio. No amount of make-up is going to fix that and I say that as a big Russell Crowe fan.



You can't win an argument just by being right!
I love Russell. I mean I really love him. But he's not fitting inside that pony




I'm pretty sure Matt Damon is in his 40s, and I would have cast him instead, if age were so important. Anyone better than LDC, and I think plenty of people match that description in my opinion.
We'll agree to disagree on that. While I have nothing but respect for DiCaprio's performances, I'm yet to see a Damon performance that impresses me.



Okay... Did you think he was in his 20s when he did Gladiator 17 years ago?

Besides his age, Crowe doesn't have the star power and respect he once had and certainly nowhere near as much as DiCaprio. No amount of make-up is going to fix that and I say that as a big Russell Crowe fan.
I think the emphasis on age is overlooking the essence of what I said earlier ... it's about getting the right "fit" ... and of course, that is subjective. No one's looking through LDC's beard and going, "Oh, he's got 2 wrinkles on his chin, so he must be around 40." ... mid 30s ... early 50s ... could pass for "40s".

You know and I know and everyone knows that a character's age doesn't always match the age of the actor playing him/her. In fact, I'd be willing to claim that almost never do the ages match. They use late 20s actors to play high school kids, for instance.

I think your point about "star power" and "respect" are another example of what I see wrong with casting DiCaprio - because he is more of a "star" ? Don't care if he's a good fit ? He's a big star, so let's cast him ? I don't see that as a very compelling argument to cast someone. I think acting ability and role fit should be the criteria.

I honestly don't know how "famous" Tom Hardy is, compared to LDC, but he did a fabulous job in The Revenant ... he could have been a good candidate too (again, not worrying about age).