Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree. I don't dislike him at all. I just honestly believe he is very lucky. Many actors who have talent aren't given the breaks that many others get. Once someone starts having success they (hollywood/studio execs, etc) seem to ride their coattails and put them in many movies. I'm not saying he's bad at all. He's definately decent. But we don't know who the best are because the same ole' tiring actors are getting all of the parts..Ex, Matt Damon, Leonardo Toocatchaho, James Franco, Gerard Butler, Ryan Reynolds, Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, etc...
It would be nice to see some newcomers get some roles and studio execs take a chance on some unknowns. I'm personally getting tired of seeing the same damn people in every movie..It's getting a bit contrite and old...Just saying.
In fact I'm going to make a new thread on this..
I actually completely agree with you that studios seem to only employ one handful of people and that it would indeed be great to see new faces and new talent. Which is why I tend to prefer Indie and Foreign films where mostly the actors tend to be of the more "common" variety and not "superstars".
Though I would maintain that Gosling is truly a superb actor. I actually wish Hollywood would stop employing him so I could see him in a lot more interesting and truly different roles. I think he would make a perfect stage actor, there is stillness about him I love and an intensity which he can relay purely with his expressions which is rare. I say this as an avid theatre goer as well as cinema goer , Gosling to me has something quite rare.
But yep you are right, we need to let some fresh talent in and to diversify the stock. Couldn't agree with you more. Sadly studios seem to hone in on the saleability of their products and big names sell . It's all about bums on seats rather than trying to enhance our experience as an audience sadly. I recommend Indie and Foreign films if you want a bit more breadth .
I actually completely agree with you that studios seem to only employ one handful of people and that it would indeed be great to see new faces and new talent. Which is why I tend to prefer Indie and Foreign films where mostly the actors tend to be of the more "common" variety and not "superstars".
Though I would maintain that Gosling is truly a superb actor. I actually wish Hollywood would stop employing him so I could see him in a lot more interesting and truly different roles. I think he would make a perfect stage actor, there is stillness about him I love and an intensity which he can relay purely with his expressions which is rare. I say this as an avid theatre goer as well as cinema goer , Gosling to me has something quite rare.
But yep you are right, we need to let some fresh talent in and to diversify the stock. Couldn't agree with you more. Sadly studios seem to hone in on the saleability of their products and big names sell . It's all about bums on seats rather than trying to enhance our experience as an audience sadly. I recommend Indie and Foreign films if you want a bit more breadth .
I think that Ryan Gosling is one of the best actors of his generation and he's been rather judicious choosing his roles, although I actually fear the possibility of his abandoning independent movies because, despite his popularity since The Notebook (I'm not crazy about that particular movie), he's been in some really good roles in small-budget films and this is a path which can give him a wider scope than mainstream Hollywood flicks. He was superb in Half Nelson (what a role... ), The Believer and Blue Valentine, and he helped make movies like The Slaughter Rule (where David Morse was magnificent too) and the charming Lars and the Real Girl rise above their own expectations. Even an average/mediocre movie like Murder by Numbers could at least rely on an intense chemistry put forth by both him and Michael Pitt.
Gosling was also the best thing that could have happened to a movie like Drive. He's just perfect there, in my opinion.
I haven't watched The Ides of March yet, but I'm sure he'll be one of the highlights of the movie.
I disagree. I don't dislike him at all. I just honestly believe he is very lucky. Many actors who have talent aren't given the breaks that many others get. Once someone starts having success they (hollywood/studio execs, etc) seem to ride their coattails and put them in many movies. I'm not saying he's bad at all. He's definately decent. But we don't know who the best are because the same ole' tiring actors are getting all of the parts..Ex, Matt Damon, Leonardo Toocatchaho, James Franco, Gerard Butler, Ryan Reynolds, Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, etc...
It would be nice to see some newcomers get some roles and studio execs take a chance on some unknowns. I'm personally getting tired of seeing the same damn people in every movie..It's getting a bit contrite and old...Just saying.
In fact I'm going to make a new thread on this..
I can't believe you compared Ryan Gosling to Ryan Reynolds.
I think that Ryan Gosling is one of the best actors of his generation and he's been rather judicious choosing his roles, although I actually fear the possibility of his abandoning independent movies because, despite his popularity since The Notebook (I'm not crazy about that particular movie), he's been in some really good roles in small-budget films and this is a path which can give him a wider scope than mainstream Hollywood flicks. He was superb in Half Nelson (what a role... ), The Believer and Blue Valentine, and he helped make movies like The Slaughter Rule (where David Morse was magnificent too) and the charming Lars and the Real Girl rise above their own expectations. Even an average/mediocre movie like Murder by Numbers could at least rely on an intense chemistry put forth by both him and Michael Pitt.
Gosling was also the best thing that could have happened to a movie like Drive. He's just perfect there, in my opinion.
I haven't watched The Ides of March yet, but I'm sure he'll be one of the highlights of the movie.
Nice to meet another Gosling fan. I agree with you, I think he has on the whole very judiciously chosen his roles and it has paid off. I have not seen "The Notebook" ( didn't really appeal to me for some reason) and most of the films I have seen him in have tended to be smaller ones. I thought "Lars and the Real Girl" was utterly superb and such a pleasant surprise considering the premise being such an odd one . "Half Nelson" was just brilliant IMO.
I hope Gosling will consider doing theatre , he would be great at it. I suspect though the lure of Hollywood might be hard to resist... "The Ides of March" to me was quite a "European" film, no action, and a straight story. Relying on the quality of the acting and the script rather than shiny baubles to distract the audience. It is not a showy piece but a rather understated one, quietly effective and affecting.
I disagree. I don't dislike him at all. I just honestly believe he is very lucky. Many actors who have talent aren't given the breaks that many others get. Once someone starts having success they (hollywood/studio execs, etc) seem to ride their coattails and put them in many movies. I'm not saying he's bad at all. He's definately decent. But we don't know who the best are because the same ole' tiring actors are getting all of the parts..Ex, Matt Damon, Leonardo Toocatchaho, James Franco, Gerard Butler, Ryan Reynolds, Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, etc...
Ryan Gosling is not "very lucky". He has been working in this business for decades now and has he achieved A-list celebrity? Regularly starred in mainstream films like Tom Cruise?
He could have easily capitalized on his Notebook fame and appeared in every popular film afterwards but if you bothered to look at his filmography, he mainly sticks to quality roles in indie films.
Ryan Gosling is not "very lucky". He has been working in this business for decades now and has he achieved A-list celebrity? Regularly starred in mainstream films like Tom Cruise?
He could have easily capitalized on his Notebook fame and appeared in every popular film afterwards but if you bothered to look at his filmography, he mainly sticks to quality roles in indie films.
I agree. That's why I never said that he was a bad actor, and I did say that he is a good actor. But I also know that he has many years of applying his craft. Because acting is a craft. And I don't think I've personally seen him in enough movies to call him great yet. Although, I must admit, some movies he's been great in. I guess I used the wrong example for my point. I was merely trying to point out that there are alot of great actors out there with which we will never see basically because the same ole' actors get all the roles.
And yes, I think there are some really good actors who get alot of roles but my point was that there are many unknowns that won't ever get the shot (that we'll never see) because many movie studios, and execs are too afraid to make a big movie without an already known A-lister..But don't get what I'm saying wrong. He is a very good actor. I don't define anyone that young as great. Even if I think they someday will be, if he isn't already.
There are just a few that I think that have that "great quality" with few gigs under them. One of them was Leonardo Dicaprio and another one is dead (Heath Ledger). I thought early on Leonardo Dicaprio was great from seeing him in the movie, "The basketball diaries" and "What's eating Gilbert Grape". Ledger I saw it with, "Brokeback mountain". Christian Bale and Ryan Gosling are right up there pounding on the door. Wheather they are already there is up to the individual judging them..Personally I didn't care for the movie Blue Valentine. Didn't mean I didn't like his acting ability in it. Just the movie left me unimpressed. But I guess it's because I went into it with higher hopes. Probably because I know that he is a very good actor...But the plot of a movie is also not the actors fault...
I can't honestly say that he's ever been bad in anything (acting wise). Leonardo is another one that I can't really say that I think that he was ever bad at anything...
Some actors are good from the get (like a natural). Some got better with time, ex. Brad Pitt. Did you ever see him in the movie, "The wrong side of the tracks",(I think that is what it was called with Ricky Shroeder)or on the hit show, "Dallas". God he was awful. But then look at him in "Kalifornia". A movie in which to this day, I thought that he played one of his best roles in (Same for Juliett Luis).He played an excellent role in that movie as a white trash serial killer. And many roles since, he has been spot on (acting wise)...
Ryan Gosling was in the Mickey mouse club. Has been an enertainer/dacner, etc since he was just a kid. All I am really saying is, let some other actors develop.Almost nobodys great overnight...Nothing against the already good to great ones. But I am tired of seeing the same five or six actors in every single movie.
And btw, I am going this weekend with my women to see Ideas of March..We used to go to the movies once a week, but now it's once every other week. Too many bills and we started this when there wasn't nothing to see. We usually go out to eat beforehand. However, with the way movies go, it might not even be out by the end of this weekend. It didn't do great. That and Moneyball which seemed like the only good movies to see got beat out by a boring Hugh Jackarse and his stupid robot boxing film by a good amount. Now I see why good movies aren't put out anymore. It's an insult that a stupid movie like that could make more than three times the amount as those two good films. Well I'm assuming this will be good. Moneyball sure was....
I liked Ides of March too, although I thought it was too "simplistic", I was expecting more twists/complexity of plot in this one, but I liked it nonetheless.
Check out - Charlie Wilson's War, Syriana and Michael Clayton. They all lie in the same,political thriller genre (CW War with Tom Hanks and the other two with George Clooney) and in my opinion lives up to the hype a little more than The Ides of March in terms of complexity of plot! Also check out "Burn After Reading" a somewhat political movie but more of a comedy and carries the usual quirkiness of Coen Brother movies (which I love!)
Ryan Gosling was great in both Drive and The Ides of March, he is turning out to be a great young actor with lots of potential/promise!
Cheers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cida
I thought it was the best American movie I've seen in a while.
I liked Ides of March too, although I thought it was too "simplistic", I was expecting more twists/complexity of plot in this one, but I liked it nonetheless.
Check out - Charlie Wilson's War, Syriana and Michael Clayton. They all lie in the same,political thriller genre (CW War with Tom Hanks and the other two with George Clooney) and in my opinion lives up to the hype a little more than The Ides of March in terms of complexity of plot! Also check out "Burn After Reading" a somewhat political movie but more of a comedy and carries the usual quirkiness of Coen Brother movies (which I love!)
Ryan Gosling was great in both Drive and The Ides of March, he is turning out to be a great young actor with lots of potential/promise!
Cheers.
Right, I've seen all of those, liked them all, but wasn't passionately in love with them. I'd like to see Syriana again, though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
