Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

flipp525 wrote:This isn't about Jennifer Lawrence AT ALL. I loved her performances in both films. It was - and I'm going to say this in the simplest terms that I can think of - about you using the actress' name as a stand-in for big and showy while in the same breath praising that same actress for subtlety in another role. It would be like me whether someone would go for a naturalistic style of acting or go all Dustin Hoffman in Marathon Man. And then, in the next sentence, praise his less showy work in Little Big Man.

And your explanation that going "full Jennifer Lawrence" now means a whiplash change of style did not seem (to me) how you used it at first which is probably why I made a comment about it. You said that Larsen can either go with a naturalistic style of acting or "go full Jennifer Lawrence" [in American Hustle]. That sentence (again, to me, at the time) was not saying, "Brie Larsen can either go with a naturalistic style of acting or experiment with different styles of acting."

Let's just move on.

I love LITTLE BIG MAN. I think it is a very underrated movie, and certainly under-nominated by the Oscars. It should have been nominated for Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, Lead Actor, Supporting Actor (its only nomination), and Make-Up. It is certainly better than fucking AIRPORT or LOVE STORY.

As for the other matter, you should have read my original post as "Larson can either stick with her naturalistic style of acting, or abandon it like Jennifer Lawrence did." I agree, we should just move on.

This isn't about Jennifer Lawrence AT ALL. I loved her performances in both films. It was - and I'm going to say this in the simplest terms that I can think of - about you using the actress' name as a stand-in for big and showy while in the same breath praising that same actress for subtlety in another role. It would be like me whether someone would go for a naturalistic style of acting or go all Dustin Hoffman in Marathon Man. And then, in the next sentence, praise his less showy work in Little Big Man.

And your explanation that going "full Jennifer Lawrence" now means a whiplash change of style did not seem (to me) how you used it at first which is probably why I made a comment about it. You said that Larsen can either go with a naturalistic style of acting or "go full Jennifer Lawrence" [in American Hustle]. That sentence (again, to me, at the time) was not saying, "Brie Larsen can either go with a naturalistic style of acting or experiment with different styles of acting."

Let's just move on.

flipp525 wrote:rolo, I'm not even going to continue this debate other than to say, if you'd like to use one actor to demonstrate how one can be big and broad in one stroke and then subtle in the next, you should probably not use their name as an adjective to refer exclusively to the former quality. How are you not able to follow this simple idea?

The fact that you ended your post in a direct question to me suggests you do want to continue this "debate." I was not even aware there was a debate. I thought it was beyond debate that Jennifer Lawrence's performance in WINTER'S BONE is quiet and subtle, while her performances in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE are loud and showy. By debate, perhaps you mean whether one is preferable to the other. I liked Jennifer Lawrence in WINTER'S BONE, you seem to be prefer her in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE. I am not trying to change your mind. If you like those performances, that is fine by me.

My original post was saying Brie Larson gave a performance of the same tone and quality as Lawrence in WINTER'S BONE. Then I said, I hope she does not follow Lawrence's example of moving on to loud and big performances. I want Larson to continue with her subdued acting style, the same way I wish Lawrence would return to a subdued acting style, or Al Pacino, or Jack Nicholson, etc. I see nothing contradictory in saying Lawrence gave a brilliant performance in WINTER'S BONE and then gave two performances I was less impressed with (but which were by no means bad) in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE.

By "going full Jennifer Lawrence" I meant the whiplash change in style. I could have said "going full Al Pacino" or "full Jack Nicholson" but Lawrence and Larsen are of the same generation, so it just made more sense.

rolo, I'm not even going to continue this debate other than to say, if you'd like to use one actor to demonstrate how one can be big and broad in one stroke and then subtle in the next, you should probably not use their name as an adjective to refer exclusively to the former quality. How are you not able to follow this simple idea?

flipp525 wrote:

rolotomasi99 wrote:Are you seriously telling me you do not see the difference between an amazingly naturalistic performance like Jennifer gave in WINTER'S BONE versus the exhausting capital-A acting she does in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE?

No, that's not what I said at all. And, please don't be mistaken, I'm not confused. I just thought it was weird that you used the same actress for both sides of your argument especially when you literally used her name as an adjective (an adjective that apparently means to act big and broadly?). And it is odd, sorry.

I guess it is the same way you never know which type of Al Pacino you are going to get. Will it be the subtle beauty we see in his first two Michael Corleone performances, or the shouting, bug-eyed, craziness he sometimes delivers?

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/The_ ... f_Shouting

If I misunderstood your original post, maybe it was because it was so cryptic. Jennifer Lawrence has given two very big performances (even bigger than the characters required, I would say) while also giving one of the most beautifully understated performances I have seen in years. How are you not able to follow this simple idea? If you disagree, just say so. No need to use random words like "weird" and "odd" since they do little to convey your thoughts. That is why I am left having to explain to you why subtle acting can be a beautiful thing.

rolotomasi99 wrote:Are you seriously telling me you do not see the difference between an amazingly naturalistic performance like Jennifer gave in WINTER'S BONE versus the exhausting capital-A acting she does in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE?

No, that's not what I said at all. And, please don't be mistaken, I'm not confused. I just thought it was weird that you used the same actress for both sides of your argument especially when you literally used her name as an adjective (an adjective that apparently means to act big and broadly?). And it is odd, sorry.

flipp525 wrote:

rolotomasi99 wrote:

OscarGuy wrote:Brie Larson deserved an Oscar nomination for Short Term 12.

Absolutely agreed. Hopefully we will be seeing more of her. I hope she sticks with the naturalistic style of acting she aced in that film rather than going full Jennifer Lawrence. Larson's performance in SHORT TERM 12 reminded me of the astonishing work from Lawrence in WINTER'S BONE.

You insult Jennifer Lawrence and then use her as an example of good acting? Weird post.

Are you seriously telling me you do not see the difference between an amazingly naturalistic performance like Jennifer gave in WINTER'S BONE versus the exhausting capital-A acting she does in SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK and AMERICAN HUSTLE? I know the writing and directing of a film obviously influence what type of performance an actor gives, but I just do not like this louder Jennifer that is getting all the attention and awards. I can enjoy a big performance as much as the next person (I loved Blanchett in BLUE JASMINE and DiCaprio in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET), but I also appreciate a truly subtle performance like Larson gave or Phoenix in HER. Sometimes I enjoy having a performance sneak up on me, which is what happened with Larson in SHORT TERM 12. She built her character slowly and then just devastated you with a simple look or line delivery.

I am sorry if my appreciation of subtle and quiet performances confuses you. I hope this follow-up post explains why I feel this way. Even if you personally do no like subtle performances, I hope you can at least somewhat understand why I enjoy them. I hope Jennifer Lawrence gets a role and a director who will let her be quiet and calm again.

rolotomasi99 wrote:

OscarGuy wrote:Brie Larson deserved an Oscar nomination for Short Term 12.

Absolutely agreed. Hopefully we will be seeing more of her. I hope she sticks with the naturalistic style of acting she aced in that film rather than going full Jennifer Lawrence. Larson's performance in SHORT TERM 12 reminded me of the astonishing work from Lawrence in WINTER'S BONE.

You insult Jennifer Lawrence and then use her as an example of good acting? Weird post.

OscarGuy wrote:Brie Larson deserved an Oscar nomination for Short Term 12.

Absolutely agreed. Hopefully we will be seeing more of her. I hope she sticks with the naturalistic style of acting she aced in that film rather than going full Jennifer Lawrence. Larson's performance in SHORT TERM 12 reminded me of the astonishing work from Lawrence in WINTER'S BONE.

I'll give him one thing. Brie Larson deserved an Oscar nomination for Short Term 12. The rest I don't care about.

Bog wrote:

mojoe92 wrote:My line-up for this year would have been

Oprah Winfrey- The Butler
Brie Larson- Short Term 12
Greta Gerwig- Frances Ha
Vera Farmiga- The Conjuring
Melissa McCarthy- The Heat

Now with the actual line up

My heart is to Judi Dench for Philomena, but I'm happy with any of them winning as long as it's not Amy Adams, American Hustle was the biggest piece of shit I've seen in 10 years. Acting was atrocious, no plot, and I have a big problem with people in the 70's talking like modern day hipsters. The movie deserved Razzies not Oscars. I have lost respect for the academy for nominating it for anything so anyone can win in this or any category as long as its not American Hustle

Haha...April fool's??? All 126 words of it? No? Damn...

I'm sorry, which part exactly ?

mojoe92 wrote:My line-up for this year would have been

Oprah Winfrey- The Butler
Brie Larson- Short Term 12
Greta Gerwig- Frances Ha
Vera Farmiga- The Conjuring
Melissa McCarthy- The Heat

Now with the actual line up

My heart is to Judi Dench for Philomena, but I'm happy with any of them winning as long as it's not Amy Adams, American Hustle was the biggest piece of shit I've seen in 10 years. Acting was atrocious, no plot, and I have a big problem with people in the 70's talking like modern day hipsters. The movie deserved Razzies not Oscars. I have lost respect for the academy for nominating it for anything so anyone can win in this or any category as long as its not American Hustle

Haha...April fool's??? All 126 words of it? No? Damn...

My line-up for this year would have been

Oprah Winfrey- The Butler
Brie Larson- Short Term 12
Greta Gerwig- Frances Ha
Vera Farmiga- The Conjuring
Melissa McCarthy- The Heat

Now with the actual line up

My heart is to Judi Dench for Philomena, but I'm happy with any of them winning as long as it's not Amy Adams, American Hustle was the biggest piece of shit I've seen in 10 years. Acting was atrocious, no plot, and I have a big problem with people in the 70's talking like modern day hipsters. The movie deserved Razzies not Oscars. I have lost respect for the academy for nominating it for anything so anyone can win in this or any category as long as its not American Hustle

I don't love her screenplay. It pivots into relationship tangents that I just don't care that much about but it's a charming, charming film and I want a lot more from this stunningly beautiful funny woman.

Sabin wrote:Or perhaps Lake Bell, such a charming rom com headliner in In a World... .

OMG, thank you! Lake Bell is most definitely on my list for Best Actress this year. I'd also cite her for the great, unexpected screenplay. What a hilarious and just utterly charming performance.