First, the story to me was interesting as it was based on something that actually happened (well, as the movie said in the beginning- "some of this happened). Second, to you, story is most important,and that's fine. But here's a list of films for which story is, well, really not that important: Pulp Fiction Taxi Driver Once Upon a Time in the West Citizen Kane 2001: A Space Odyssey MASH Sideways Mean Streets No Country for Old Men Midnight Cowboy Apocalypse Now (well, sort of) So, you have every right to say that these don't interest you because of that. You'd be in the minority, but it's your right. Story is important, but it's not the only thing. And in terms of "interesting characters," again, depends on your world view. A character like Travis Bickle, to me, is interesting as is Vito Corleone or Nelson Mandela. Again, that's where your world view- and possibly politics- comes into play. You see certain characters/people as unworthy of your time- for me, it depends on how it's presented.
that's completely meaningless to me. A story is not good or bad because it really happened. Don't like most of those movies, also disagree that story isn't important in those. it's the most important by far. I can tolerate bad acting if a movie has a good story. I can't tolerate a bad story even if the acting is great.
Taste is one thing- my comment was solely in reference to the "I find most movies that take place in this setting (70's drug disco era) to be uninteresting." OK, first, did you not know that this movie was in that era? Why waste your time watching it anyway? And second, the "70s drug disco era" - what the hell is that, anyway? Oh, but we didn't have movies like Drugstore Cowboy in the 80s or Pulp Fiction, etc. in the 90s. It just sounded like a stupid characterization/generalization to me, that's all. He's entitled to his criteria and opinion- and I can comment on it, too. And we agree to disagree.
I have watched plenty of movies I expect not to like. So has everyone else on this forum. So have you. what is disco?
The 70s drug disco era. Specifically, are we talking about 1974 to 1980? Or would it be more like 1976 to 1979? And the drug era- I think the 60s would equally take the "drug era" mantle. I guess your characterization leaves me puzzled. Any movies in particular that would fit in this genre, beyond Saturday Night Fever? Wait, what about Forrest Gump? It does have that part in the middle during the "disco era"- oops, sorry, the "drug disco" era. I just can't come up with any movies in that era, for some reason- except for good ones, of course. :grin: Oh, here's one you'd absolutely LOVE:
jesus man. What crawled up your anus? I am obviously referring to the disco scene which everyone understood (including you). Why are you throwing a hissy fit? aren't you a grown man?
Umm, you're the only one acting agitated, sir. Sarcasm does not equate to "hissy fit" or the other vulgar phrase you used. You must care, otherwise you wouldn't keep responding. Sorry to have offended you.
That was a typical criticism of this movie, and I have to agree somewhat. I think it had to do with the fact that the screenwriter they had wasn't as good as he could have been. From what I've read, the actors improvised a lot b/c the script wasn't working. That was the difference and his last 2 films- Silver Linings Playbook and The Fighter- I think those were better constructed.
IMO, I felt like Silver Linings Playbook was probably one of the best films I've ever seen. I felt that Bradly Cooper did an amazing job along with Jennifer Lawerence. The cast overall was great in that movie. My wife's complaint seem to be around Jennifer Lawerence's accent. The New Jersey accent kept going in-and-out. I just thought they were trying to do too much in the film though. I could see the actors improvising with this script.
I'm currently writing a screenplay and the model I'm using for general ideas is Silver Linings Playbook. I got a copy of it when I was at the Santa Fe Independent Film Festival, and you can tell it's well-written from the get-go. What's really cool is reading a page, then seeing how an actor can take something and really make it shine. I mean, the script does have some directions like (Long Pause) before he talks to the doctor about the "incident," but in others, it's all him and how he chooses to say it. I felt these actors were probably a bit over the top in American Hustle - except for Christian Bale- he's the best one to me because he uses a lot of restraint and tension- he's just outstanding in that film. Worst accent ever, though, has to go to either Kevin Costner in Robin Hood or Tom Hanks in Volunteers- especially like Hanks, but that accent was godawful.
Bale at the top of his game in this, often without saying anything. The problem with the film is the attempt to excuse politicians taking bribes and con men thieving because of some supposed good intentions (and conversely portray Bradley Cooper's character as a bad guy when he did nothing wrong).
Agreed, although I was glad that it did show the mayor was running with some crooks, or else it would've felt like a huge entrapment scheme that the mayor would never had gotten into if it weren't for the FBI. Also, yes Amy Adams.
I enjoyed this more than Wolf. No disrespect to Wolf intended. I'm just chiming in. Christian Bale and Jonah Hill gave the best performances in both. Leonardo has done better. I like the Irving role more than Jordan. Plus, the female roles are stronger in American Hustle (both Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence were superb); albeit, I look forward to more Margot Robbie
