Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby AlexPKeaton on Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:59 pm

tifosi77 wrote:
meecrofilm wrote:Just curious... could you provide your list of talented, A-list actresses who are also really, really, ridiculously good-looking? I can't imagine it being very long.

Angelina Jolie (Oscar winner)
Jennifer Aniston (Emmy, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Halle Berry (Oscar winner)
Cate Blanchett (Oscar winner)
Penélope Cruz (Oscar, BAFTA winner, SAG; Golden Globe nominee)
Cameron Diaz (SAG, Golden Globe nominee)
Salma Hayek (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe nominee)
Scarlett Johansson (BAFTA winner; Golden Globe nominee)
Mila Kunis (SAG and Golden Globe nominee)
Hilary Swank (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Charlize Theron (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Uma Thurman (Golden Globe winner; Oscar, SAG nominee)
Kate Winslet (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Catherine Zeta-Jones (Oscar, SAG winner; Golden Globe nominee)

It has been a pretty slow day today....


I'd add:

Olivia Wilde - talented enough but insanely good looking
Gemma Arterton - very good looking
Natalie Portman - very talented, very good looking
Claire Danes - not as good looking, but I think the most talented female actress around
AlexPKeaton
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,718
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:46 am
Location: Malkinite Compound

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby shmenguin on Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:44 pm

kate winslet was an attractive woman, but i never thought she was "hot".
shmenguin
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 23,146
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:34 pm

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby slappybrown on Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:50 pm

shmenguin wrote:
meecrofilm wrote:
Froggy wrote:
llipgh2 wrote:The people cast in Silver Linings Playbook can actually act. Thie movie (I'm assuming, never saw it) is a bad movie with lousy actors.

Actually, never saw SLB either, but everyone in it can act.

Assuming that Love Happens is bad without seeing it is different than assuming SLP is good without seeing it? And Aaron Eckhart and Jennifer Aniston are both good enough actors.


No, that's pretty much the same scenario, you're right. And agreed, especially with the former -- Eckhart is solid.

But assuming SLP is bad because Love Happens is bad is where the issue is, I think.


this is at least the 3rd time i've said this, and this will probably be the 3rd time it's ignored...i don't assume SLP is bad. it might be a perfectly pleasant movie, but i discredit it as oscar-caliber because of its un-compelling premise. and the fact that the culmination revolves around a dance contest certainly doesn't help.


The reason it keeps being ignored is because its aggressively stupid.

I've never seen SLP, but how you can conclude it is or is not "oscar-caliber" based on an "uncompelling premise", when it features highly-acclaimed performances by its actors/actresses makes no sense. Maybe it doesn't interest you, and that's fine, but just staking out this position is silly IMO.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,733
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby The Snapshot on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:11 pm

slappybrown wrote:
shmenguin wrote:
meecrofilm wrote:
Froggy wrote:
llipgh2 wrote:The people cast in Silver Linings Playbook can actually act. Thie movie (I'm assuming, never saw it) is a bad movie with lousy actors.

Actually, never saw SLB either, but everyone in it can act.

Assuming that Love Happens is bad without seeing it is different than assuming SLP is good without seeing it? And Aaron Eckhart and Jennifer Aniston are both good enough actors.


No, that's pretty much the same scenario, you're right. And agreed, especially with the former -- Eckhart is solid.

But assuming SLP is bad because Love Happens is bad is where the issue is, I think.


this is at least the 3rd time i've said this, and this will probably be the 3rd time it's ignored...i don't assume SLP is bad. it might be a perfectly pleasant movie, but i discredit it as oscar-caliber because of its un-compelling premise. and the fact that the culmination revolves around a dance contest certainly doesn't help.


The reason it keeps being ignored is because its aggressively stupid.

I've never seen SLP, but how you can conclude it is or is not "oscar-caliber" based on an "uncompelling premise", when it features highly-acclaimed performances by its actors/actresses makes no sense. Maybe it doesn't interest you, and that's fine, but just staking out this position is silly IMO.


I've seen the movie with my wife and another couple. I really like the husband in the other couple, but he is clearly more of a "yes dear" guy than I am. That said, the other three (him included) wanted to see this movie. I went along without any expectation of seeing a good movie.

The movie was very entertaining, and the portrayal of two folks simultaneously dealing with mental illness striking up a relationship that benefits both of them - culminating in a Dance contest as a "moment" for each of them was actually genius. The entire movie was Oscar worthy.

The characters were great. Jennifer Lawrence was as likeable and nuanced in her role - as likeable as she is in "real" life, that she deserved what she got. Anyone who knows someone close to them that has struggled with mental illness in any way would have empathy for her character, Bradley Cooper's as well as the family around them's intense feelings and actions in the most emotional scenes. In my eyes, you could cut this intensity with a knife yet it never went over the top into a characature.

Plus, apparently she smokes weed like the rest of the world and tells great stories about her brothers treating her mercilessly in her younger days. I mean, she would be fun to hang out with it seems.
The Snapshot
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,319
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:28 am
Location: Somewhere between here and there

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby tifosi77 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:23 pm

AlexPKeaton wrote:
tifosi77 wrote:
meecrofilm wrote:Just curious... could you provide your list of talented, A-list actresses who are also really, really, ridiculously good-looking? I can't imagine it being very long.

Angelina Jolie (Oscar winner)
Jennifer Aniston (Emmy, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Halle Berry (Oscar winner)
Cate Blanchett (Oscar winner)
Penélope Cruz (Oscar, BAFTA winner, SAG; Golden Globe nominee)
Cameron Diaz (SAG, Golden Globe nominee)
Salma Hayek (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe nominee)
Scarlett Johansson (BAFTA winner; Golden Globe nominee)
Mila Kunis (SAG and Golden Globe nominee)
Hilary Swank (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Charlize Theron (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Uma Thurman (Golden Globe winner; Oscar, SAG nominee)
Kate Winslet (Oscar, SAG, Golden Globe winner)
Catherine Zeta-Jones (Oscar, SAG winner; Golden Globe nominee)

It has been a pretty slow day today....


I'd add:

Olivia Wilde - talented enough but insanely good looking
Gemma Arterton - very good looking
Natalie Portman - very talented, very good looking
Claire Danes - not as good looking, but I think the most talented female actress around

I don't dispute the relative hotness of those ladies, but the list was compiled to refute the assertion that the list of "talented, A-list actresses who are also really, really, ridiculously good-looking" would not be very expansive. The factors that went into the creation of my list were, 1) Are they generally considered "really, really, ridiculously good-looking"? 2) Are they 'talented'? (So I searched by wins of or nominations for major acting awards) and finally 3) Are they A-list? (Which I interpret as someone who can influence things like casting their male counterpart, or command eight-figure salaries, or who can get a project greenlit simply by attaching their name to it) I don't think any of your additions pass the third test, although Portman is probably the closest.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,905
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby slappybrown on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:24 pm

Natalie Portman isn't A-list? Huh?
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,733
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby tifosi77 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:47 pm

Portman only makes about $6 million or $7 million per film, so I felt I had to cut her. Although I have read that she is regarded as the most 'bankable' female star in Hollywood.

Now that I think of it, I probably should have included Sandra Bullock on the original list as well.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,905
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby count2infinity on Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:04 pm

"only makes about $6 million or $7 million per film"... only.
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,336
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby shmenguin on Fri Mar 01, 2013 5:25 pm

slappybrown wrote:The reason it keeps being ignored is because its aggressively stupid.

that's not really the reason, but you needed a fun segue into your point, so ok.
slappybrown wrote:I've never seen SLP, but how you can conclude it is or is not "oscar-caliber" based on an "uncompelling premise", when it features highly-acclaimed performances by its actors/actresses makes no sense. Maybe it doesn't interest you, and that's fine, but just staking out this position is silly IMO.


if only my first post in this thread acknowledged the flimsiness of my POV.
shmenguin
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 23,146
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:34 pm

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby tifosi77 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:03 pm

count2infinity wrote:"only makes about $6 million or $7 million per film"... only.

I know, right? :face:
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,905
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby mac5155 on Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:21 pm

Kate beckinsale mmm
mac5155
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 48,048
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:06 pm
Location: governor of Fayettenam

Re: Jack Nicholson puts the moves on Jennifer Lawrence

Postby slappybrown on Sat Mar 02, 2013 7:06 am

shmenguin wrote:
slappybrown wrote:The reason it keeps being ignored is because its aggressively stupid.

that's not really the reason, but you needed a fun segue into your point, so ok.
slappybrown wrote:I've never seen SLP, but how you can conclude it is or is not "oscar-caliber" based on an "uncompelling premise", when it features highly-acclaimed performances by its actors/actresses makes no sense. Maybe it doesn't interest you, and that's fine, but just staking out this position is silly IMO.


if only my first post in this thread acknowledged the flimsiness of my POV.

I was just telling you why :shrug: knowing its dumb doesn't help either.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,733
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Previous

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dodint, DudeMan2766, mikey287, skullman80, SolidSnake, the wicked child and 8 guests


e-mail