Forum Replies Created
December 15, 2019 at 10:16 am #1203238334
I’m sorry, but this episode was garbage. I’m shocked at how poor the writing was. You’d think a star as enormous as Scarlett would’ve gotten better material than this. It’s like they knew Eddie Murphy was finally returning next week and they tried to save all of their good skits for him. Skit after skit fell flat, with the only thing of value in most of them being performers doing their very best to salvage this mess. Keenan, Cecily, and Bowen all worked their butts off for material that really didn’t deserve it, but I’m grateful for their efforts anyway. Those three actually got stronger showcases than the host. Scarlett was fine. She didn’t have anything to work with, but she tried. Once again, Pete Davidson has to leave this show. It’s one thing to suck at sketch comedy, but what’s the point of having a cast member who is barely ever on the show? We’re not even halfway through this season, and the sporadic nature of his appearances has already been lampshaded several times by now. Granted, I’m not complaining about his absence, as he’s a total weak link, but it’s ridiculous that he’s allowed to stay on while contributing practically nothing. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a cast member get this kind of special treatment before, but Davidson definitely doesn’t deserve it. Anyway, while I’ve criticized the show for overusing Kate McKinnon in the past, this episode might’ve benefited from more of her. This episode was a good sign that she can be entertaining when she’s not constantly being shoved into your face. They just need to strike a balance between using her too much and only having her in two sketches (pretty sure she didn’t appear anymore than that last night). Also, the effects in that terrible stripper ghost song left a lot to be desired. Cecily’s head straight up disappeared when she leaned over (I saw they altered the effects in the YouTube version so that didn’t happen). And the Trump pug seemed to make the audience uncomfortable. Maybe it’s just because this version’s writing was worse than the first time they did it (although I can’t really remember if it was good or not then, as it’s been awhile), but the audience seemed to barely respond to it, not that they were giving big laughs to a lot of other sketches though. Overall, this episode just felt aimless. It’s one of the only times when I found myself way more interested in the musical guest than to the sketches. You’d think Colin Jost would’ve given Scarlett something better to work with. Hopefully next week is better, which I actually think it will be.December 15, 2019 at 7:54 am #1203238024
Both are great, but Driver deserves it more. Scarlett does a lot of great work, but Driver has a lot more moments that just hit you like a sledgehammer. He’s helped by the fact that Charlie is a bigger, showier, and more sympathetic role than Nicole. Both are worthy, but if only one can win, it should be Adam.December 13, 2019 at 9:40 pm #1203235493
Finally saw Marriage Story and I utterly adored it. I’ll likely say more later, I’d be happy with wins in Best Picture, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actress (although Zhao was definitely better), and Screenplay.December 12, 2019 at 9:07 am #1203233694
I don’t know a whole lot about this show, but I know some of the music and characters. This was a very good trailer. Looks fun and heartfelt, and the cast looks strong. I’m very happy for Anthony Ramos getting to lead a big film like this. He’s a delightful and charismatic actor, an awesome rapper, and a beautiful singer. Hopefully this helps open up some more doors for him.December 12, 2019 at 4:20 am #1203233298
Oh yeah. The poor hard-working men and mean Natalie embarrassing them on air. Please. The comment was tame if anything. The truth is what people are uncomfortable with. All she said was that they were male. They were devastated I’m sure. They had to google the % of male best director nominees to feel better about themselves.
She purposefully overshadowed Guillermo’s victory and basically said that one of those directors didn’t deserve to be nominated. Kind of a dick move.December 12, 2019 at 2:22 am #1203233212
I actually thought Portman’s comment was fair, albeit rude. Stone’s comment was worse because Gerwig was actually nominated that time and she also disrespected Peele in the process
I’ll cut Stone some slack since she was just reading off a teleprompter when she said that, unlike Portman who’s comment was obviously improvised. But you’re right in saying that Stone’s comment was worse. It’s fine to show support for a snubbed contender, just don’t do it right before you announce who’s won their category. But namedropping Gerwig when she was actually nominated is an unfair showing of bias. Emphasizing her also felt pretty embarrassing since she didn’t even win, and pretty much nobody was predicting her to pull off an upset in the first place. She was likely fourth, behind Nolan (Lady Bird was a bigger contender than Dunkirk, but the technical marvel of Nolan’s work likely put him ahead of Gerwig’s much more subdued style) and Peele.December 12, 2019 at 1:59 am #1203233196
She did what had to be done. You can’t fight blatant sexism with “kind words” or “pretty please”s. She saw a moment and she seized it. Thanks to her Greta Gerwig got an Oscar nomination, Globe producers were so shook the next year (when they had 5 male nominees again) they had a male actor present the category alone.
Gerwig would’ve been nominated anyway. People were saying she was snubbed before Portman said it on air. All her comment did was demean five hard working and talented directors, and steal Del Toro’s spotlight.December 12, 2019 at 12:54 am #1203233130
Thats what I was saying! I’m sure she’ll get in now that Ronan is all but dead.
Ronan is not dead. Her film underperformed at the Globes, but she still got nominated. And her missing out at SAG wasn’t a huge surprise since we heard many times that Little Women’s screeners went out late.December 11, 2019 at 9:10 pm #1203232909
Jeff Garlin did an interview recently that said the show will be referencing Marty Funkhouser, but the character won’t be killed off: I’m sure they’ll dedicate the season premiere or an episode to him, though.
I appreciate that. It wouldn’t fit the tone of the show to make any drama out of Funkhouser dying, and it would be in bad taste if they killed the character and just brushed aside his death. I’ll miss Bob Einstein’s contributions. He was always a hoot on Curb. Sad that he’s gone.December 11, 2019 at 8:28 pm #1203232876
I mean if Christoph Waltz got to win for bigger fraud in Django Unchained, I really don’t give a shit lol
I believe Waltz was much less of a lead in Django than Pitt is in Hollywood. He’s somewhat of a tricky case to classify where he should’ve been placed, as I think he borders on both lead and supporting. His part is very big, and there’s many moments where he completely overshadows Foxx, but at the same time, I never really felt like it’s his story. Foxx is the character who really develops over the course of the journey. The plot of the film is Django growing as a character and completing his mission to save his wife. Waltz doesn’t really have much of an arc, his role is to be Foxx’s supportive mentor throughout. Also while Foxx is present throughout the entire story, Waltz is mostly absent from the last quarter. I also can’t seem to recall Waltz having any scenes where Foxx wasn’t present to some extent. I think it could be said that the character of Schultz is a lead based on the size of his role, but is supporting based on his narrative purpose.
With Pitt, I think it’s a much clearer case of a leading character. While Cliff’s character acts as a pillar of support to Rick, he still has plenty of story to himself. And it’s not like Cliff is the only one of the two supporting the other. We see that Rick returns the favor by doing the best he can to keep Cliff busy and paid, showing that they have a very codependent relationship. Rick’s story arc is definitely more pronounced than Cliff, but you can still see an arc for Cliff. It also makes sense that Rick’s is more pronounced since one of his most notable traits is his self-pitying nature. Cliff meanwhile, is more content with his life, and he’s not one to talk about his troubles, so he wouldn’t make his story as clear cause he doesn’t want to bother people with it. But moving back to their respective arcs, while Rick’s desire to reclaim his former glory is a tale of resurrection, Cliff’s feels like a tale or redemption. The second time I watched the film, I came to the conclusion that Cliff did indeed kill his wife, although I’ve yet to decide whether it was an accident or on purpose. His actions at the end could be considered his attempt to atone for this by saving the life of his friend and his new wife. We can see based on earlier events that Cliff wants to do good. He’s nobly devoted to helping his friend in need, and when he suspects George Spahn of being in danger or dead, he takes it upon himself to make sure that he’s safe. His happy demeanor as the story is wrapping up seems to imply that his successful heroics have taken a load off of his shoulder, like he’s just completed a personal journey. Also, unlike Waltz, Pitt has many moments away from DiCaprio showing his side of things. Then there’s the fact that Pitt’s narrative helps set up the Manson family, who Rick has zero involvement with until the climax. And, unlike Django, which had a few supporting roles of note, with the exception of Sharon Tate, who has much less to do than the two headlining stars, every role besides DiCaprio and Pitt in Hollywood comes across as very small, and even then, almost all of them are just there to work off of Leo and Brad. So I believe Pitt feels like a lead based on the level of his impact on the narrative and the size of his role.December 11, 2019 at 6:18 pm #1203232712
Lead. He does just as much as DiCaprio.December 11, 2019 at 2:49 pm #1203232370
My only point is that you can’t say that they don’t care about backlash. I agree she deserved it, but the connection between these two moments fit a very loud narrative that year. That year she was kind of the lone female director in the conversation, but this year you have Gerwig, Wang, Sciamma, Scafaria, Heller, Matsoukas, and Lemmons who’s films are in the conversation.
I understood what you were saying, I was just expressing my dislike for Portman’s comment.