It occurs to me that I wasn't particularly interested in this year's film offerings but instead I got more good sci-fi than I'd planned for and a few other bits to check out. Here goes
( Read more... )
Odd, I could have sworn that you suggested that I watch Half-Blood Prince before I did so.
BTW, I would like to see Ponyo, Red Cliff and Black Dynamite someday as well. And I probably would have placed Star Trek within my top 3 of the year, since that was just a pure joy to watch and the only film that tempted me to watch a second time.
And only since you asked about Clooney: why would I ever support anyone who has been responsible for more box office duds over the past two decades than Uwe Boll (who has only been responsible for flops in the past decade)?
Clooney belongs in that category of Hollywood actors who has been given every chance under the sun to succeed (financial backing, the pick of the best scripts, the finest acting supporting casts and directors to make him look better than he actually is, etc.) simply for their good looks and likability. But the box office has proved time and again that he has very little box office draw and his supposed charm has translated into zero charisma when it comes to drawing any sizable audiences.
So why the hell should I care when he actually does something notable in one movie (Up In The Air: perpetual womanizer and empty human being--gee, big stretch) when his previous four or five (where he's also in the lead role and sometimes even in the director's chair) sucked ass? And even if you ignore the box office returns and concentrate solely on his acting, you realize that George Clooney can't play anyone except George Clooney (or a facsimile of himself), despite all the top-tier scripts, supporting casts and directors he is frequently surrounded with.
There are a ton of far more talented actors and actresses that the studios can invest their full power and resources on instead a guy that bats far below the average of any other top Hollywood actor out there.
Since you're a pro-wrestling aficionado, take a look at it this way. For how many years (decades even) that Vince McMahon has constantly and consistently pushed undeserving guys to the top of the WWF/WWE roster simply because of their "look" rather than their talent? While there have been dozens (maybe even hundreds) of far better wrestlers and/or even more polished talkers fighting (sometimes even killing) amongst themselves in the lower ranks just to get the same opportunities.
Am I supposed to applaud for or invest my money in someone who regularly stinks up the joint when they suddenly have one or two decent PPV matches? (And when you analyze their good performances, how many of them were really attributed to the far more talented wrestlers they were matched up with and/or Vince McMahon's massive promotional/marketing machine?)
Due to his perplexing and unwavering support from Hollywood, George Clooney has been given about 14-15 years to become good. And now, finally he's succeeded in becoming average (or if you're a fan of his, slightly above average). Yippee. In the business or sports world, he would have been cut or fired long ago.
Up In The Air is a success due to director and screeenwriter Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You For Smoking), not Clooney. You could have inserted any number of leading Hollywood actors into that lead role and have gotten the same critical praise.
BTW, I would like to see Ponyo, Red Cliff and Black Dynamite someday as well. And I probably would have placed Star Trek within my top 3 of the year, since that was just a pure joy to watch and the only film that tempted me to watch a second time.
And only since you asked about Clooney: why would I ever support anyone who has been responsible for more box office duds over the past two decades than Uwe Boll (who has only been responsible for flops in the past decade)?
Clooney belongs in that category of Hollywood actors who has been given every chance under the sun to succeed (financial backing, the pick of the best scripts, the finest acting supporting casts and directors to make him look better than he actually is, etc.) simply for their good looks and likability. But the box office has proved time and again that he has very little box office draw and his supposed charm has translated into zero charisma when it comes to drawing any sizable audiences.
So why the hell should I care when he actually does something notable in one movie (Up In The Air: perpetual womanizer and empty human being--gee, big stretch) when his previous four or five (where he's also in the lead role and sometimes even in the director's chair) sucked ass? And even if you ignore the box office returns and concentrate solely on his acting, you realize that George Clooney can't play anyone except George Clooney (or a facsimile of himself), despite all the top-tier scripts, supporting casts and directors he is frequently surrounded with.
There are a ton of far more talented actors and actresses that the studios can invest their full power and resources on instead a guy that bats far below the average of any other top Hollywood actor out there.
Since you're a pro-wrestling aficionado, take a look at it this way. For how many years (decades even) that Vince McMahon has constantly and consistently pushed undeserving guys to the top of the WWF/WWE roster simply because of their "look" rather than their talent? While there have been dozens (maybe even hundreds) of far better wrestlers and/or even more polished talkers fighting (sometimes even killing) amongst themselves in the lower ranks just to get the same opportunities.
Am I supposed to applaud for or invest my money in someone who regularly stinks up the joint when they suddenly have one or two decent PPV matches? (And when you analyze their good performances, how many of them were really attributed to the far more talented wrestlers they were matched up with and/or Vince McMahon's massive promotional/marketing machine?)
Due to his perplexing and unwavering support from Hollywood, George Clooney has been given about 14-15 years to become good. And now, finally he's succeeded in becoming average (or if you're a fan of his, slightly above average). Yippee. In the business or sports world, he would have been cut or fired long ago.
Up In The Air is a success due to director and screeenwriter Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You For Smoking), not Clooney. You could have inserted any number of leading Hollywood actors into that lead role and have gotten the same critical praise.
Reply
Leave a comment