Film Fanatics Society - Chat Thread Watch

This discussion is closed.
Melting Sugar.
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3021
Report 8 years ago
#3021
*first proper post*

love film, love to talk about film, thought i'd join


And this is going to sound terrible, probably, but I never did see Inception. Is it actually worth watching or do you think it was over-hyped?
0
Phalanges
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3022
Report 8 years ago
#3022
I think the Empire Reveal thing is going to be Harry Potter (first one would be The Marauders Map, second one would be Hedwig) or Tintin.

Still intriguing though.

(Original post by Melting Sugar.)
And this is going to sound terrible, probably, but I never did see Inception. Is it actually worth watching or do you think it was over-hyped?
It's definitely worth watching. To my mind it's the best film out this year by a considerable margin, and this year has been pretty good for films. Whether it will look as good on TV as the big screen, I'm not so sure...
0
S-man10
Badges: 18
#3023
Report 8 years ago
#3023
(Original post by Phalanges)
I think the Empire Reveal thing is going to be Harry Potter (first one would be The Marauders Map, second one would be Hedwig) or Tintin.

Still intriguing though.



It's definitely worth watching. To my mind it's the best film out this year by a considerable margin, and this year has been pretty good for films. Whether it will look as good on TV as the big screen, I'm not so sure...
Post ni this thread when the empire thing is finally up. :teeth:
Phalanges
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3024
Report 8 years ago
#3024
Something I have been thinking of recently - why is it that recent big budget films centring on kids (Harry Potter, Narnia) almost always have terrible child actors, and yet there have been and are decent child actors out there (Jodie Foster, Dakota Fanning, Chloe Moretz, Natalie Portman, Christian Bale).

Do you think it's that for the big franchises they are poor at selecting films (going for those who will look good on the posters rather than those that can act) or do you think that it's more to do with the filming process making these kids better on smaller films (better direction, more time to teach them, etc.)?

The new Narnia film actually looks like it could be quite well made, but as soon as the kids start speaking in the trailer it just sounds awful.
0
zjs
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3025
Report 8 years ago
#3025
(Original post by Phalanges)
Something I have been thinking of recently - why is it that recent big budget films centring on kids (Harry Potter, Narnia) almost always have terrible child actors, and yet there have been and are decent child actors out there (Jodie Foster, Dakota Fanning, Chloe Moretz, Natalie Portman, Christian Bale).

Do you think it's that for the big franchises they are poor at selecting films (going for those who will look good on the posters rather than those that can act) or do you think that it's more to do with the filming process making these kids better on smaller films (better direction, more time to teach them, etc.)?

The new Narnia film actually looks like it could be quite well made, but as soon as the kids start speaking in the trailer it just sounds awful.
I think it's probably to do with the fact that child actors are more of a rarity, and due to the volume of child actors needed for recent films (i.e Harry Potter), it inevitably ends up as a casting process for a lot of "hopefuls", many of whom get the part on the basis that they need an extremely large volume of child actors.

Probably also to do with "poster-child" actors too, yeah. In the same way that Tom Cruise gets big budget Hollywood films, seemingly on the basis of his 'looks' alone and those who can actually act but aren't considered pin-ups, i.e Andy Serkis, get given roles that typecast them as either something ugly/average Joe/someone who it's acceptable to have a "less attractive" actor playing.

Think a lot of it depends on the role they get given. Take Ivana Baquero in Pan's Labyrinth for example; that role suits a child actor and is well played. Some of this is, of course, attributable to the fact she's a decent child actor, but a lot of it is the fact she's not being cast as being in scenarios involving things like fighting or lots of talking between child actors; two methods which inevitably end up with the child actors looking crap.
0
Jace Falco
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3026
Report 8 years ago
#3026
(Original post by thejonsmith)
I think it's probably to do with the fact that child actors are more of a rarity, and due to the volume of child actors needed for recent films (i.e Harry Potter), it inevitably ends up as a casting process for a lot of "hopefuls", many of whom get the part on the basis that they need an extremely large volume of child actors.

Probably also to do with "poster-child" actors too, yeah. In the same way that Tom Cruise gets big budget Hollywood films, seemingly on the basis of his 'looks' alone and those who can actually act but aren't considered pin-ups, i.e Andy Serkis, get given roles that typecast them as either something ugly/average Joe/someone who it's acceptable to have a "less attractive" actor playing.

Think a lot of it depends on the role they get given. Take Ivana Baquero in Pan's Labyrinth for example; that role suits a child actor and is well played. Some of this is, of course, attributable to the fact she's a decent child actor, but a lot of it is the fact she's not being cast as being in scenarios involving things like fighting or lots of talking between child actors; two methods which inevitably end up with the child actors looking crap.
Pan's Labyrinth :love:
1
zjs
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3027
Report 8 years ago
#3027
(Original post by Melting Sugar.)
*first proper post*

love film, love to talk about film, thought i'd join


And this is going to sound terrible, probably, but I never did see Inception. Is it actually worth watching or do you think it was over-hyped?
I've also yet to watch it.

Planning on doing so when I'm sure the quality isn't dire.
0
Phalanges
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3028
Report 8 years ago
#3028
(Original post by thejonsmith)
I think it's probably to do with the fact that child actors are more of a rarity, and due to the volume of child actors needed for recent films (i.e Harry Potter), it inevitably ends up as a casting process for a lot of "hopefuls", many of whom get the part on the basis that they need an extremely large volume of child actors.

Probably also to do with "poster-child" actors too, yeah. In the same way that Tom Cruise gets big budget Hollywood films, seemingly on the basis of his 'looks' alone and those who can actually act but aren't considered pin-ups, i.e Andy Serkis, get given roles that typecast them as either something ugly/average Joe/someone who it's acceptable to have a "less attractive" actor playing.

Think a lot of it depends on the role they get given. Take Ivana Baquero in Pan's Labyrinth for example; that role suits a child actor and is well played. Some of this is, of course, attributable to the fact she's a decent child actor, but a lot of it is the fact she's not being cast as being in scenarios involving things like fighting or lots of talking between child actors; two methods which inevitably end up with the child actors looking crap.
Interesting points. I do agree with a lot of points in your last paragraph - any decent child performance generally has a kid playing a mature role (Foster in Taxi Driver, Portman in Leon).

I just find it odd that Harry Potter would spend so much money on actors, direction etc. and then not really give a toss about how the main actors can perform. I suspect that if the first film had someone like a Spielberg or a Scorsese directing it things might have turned out differently in that department...
0
zjs
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3029
Report 8 years ago
#3029
(Original post by Phalanges)
Interesting points. I do agree with a lot of points in your last paragraph - any decent child performance generally has a kid playing a mature role (Foster in Taxi Driver, Portman in Leon).

I just find it odd that Harry Potter would spend so much money on actors, direction etc. and then not really give a toss about how the main actors can perform. I suspect that if the first film had someone like a Spielberg or a Scorsese directing it things might have turned out differently in that department...
I think it's generally always a bad move to have child actors playing off other child actors; especially in a film like Harry Potter where the majority of the series involves little to no interaction with adult actors; and when there is the interaction, it shows how poor their performances are - for example, any scene with Alan Rickman ends up with him stealing the scene, often without having to speak.
0
Anamaria90
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3030
Report 8 years ago
#3030
Just seen Magnolia on UnknownKing321's recommendation. Great shout - that film was amazing! Even if it is 3 hours long and the ending is completely WTF.
0
Roobsa
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3031
Report 8 years ago
#3031
Finished watching Scott Pilgrim Vs The World a few minutes ago. I can't remember a film that I've enjoyed that much in a very very long time.
0
Seanisonfire
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3032
Report 8 years ago
#3032
The child actor in Where the Wild Things Are was really good
0
Ape Gone Insane
Badges: 15
#3033
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3033
About to watch Observe and Report then going to re-watch Kung Fu Panda. :wizard:

And then my weekend will be lots of Law reading. :work:
Ape Gone Insane
Badges: 15
#3034
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3034
(Original post by Melting Sugar.)
*first proper post*

love film, love to talk about film, thought i'd join


And this is going to sound terrible, probably, but I never did see Inception. Is it actually worth watching or do you think it was over-hyped?
Welcome!

To be honest, hype doesn't necessarily make what is already a good movie ... bad. Definitely worth a watch, it's a high concept film and those films are usually always good and remembered in later years. Let us know of your thoughts on the film after/when you watch it.
Ape Gone Insane
Badges: 15
#3035
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3035
(Original post by Phalanges)
I think the Empire Reveal thing is going to be Harry Potter (first one would be The Marauders Map, second one would be Hedwig) or Tintin.

Still intriguing though.
4 images now. Still :iiam: I guess. Comments seem pretty set on it being Tintin.



http://www.empireonline.com/reveal/

:iiam:
Deshi
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3036
Report 8 years ago
#3036
Have watched Million Dollar Baby and Taken (for the 10th time) today. Thought MDB was really good, but it would have had more of an effect if I hadn't read about the ending before watching :facepalm2:

And Taken is just pure bad ass.
0
Chrosson
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3037
Report 8 years ago
#3037
(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
x
I can't write a message on your 'wall' (or whatever tsr calls it)
0
Ape Gone Insane
Badges: 15
#3038
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3038
(Original post by Chrosson)
I can't write a message on your 'wall' (or whatever tsr calls it)
Indeed. Wall posting is disabled. :wizard:
Roobsa
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3039
Report 8 years ago
#3039
Anyone watching The Amityville Horror in ITV? Haven't seen the original (yet) but I'm quite enjoying it!
0
S-man10
Badges: 18
#3040
Report 8 years ago
#3040
(Original post by Ape Gone Insane)
Indeed. Wall posting is disabled. :wizard:
Some of the comments people post are ridiculous tbph.
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?

Yes (52)
29.89%
No - I got the required grades (100)
57.47%
No - I missed the required grades and didn't get in (22)
12.64%

Watched Threads

View All