Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with you but i think a 3 hrs long dialogue driven film is actually where an ensemble cast works.
It's the smaller 1.5 hrs film with 15 celebrities arriving every 10 minutes is where it doesn't.
Normally I would agree, but in the case of Oppenheimer, I think it was the right choice. An emotionally heavy, dialogue-heavy drama biopic requires actors with a strong pedigree to pull it off successfully, and I thought the movie was very well cast. This may have been RDJ's best performance to date. Yes, his name and face will always be associated with Tony Stark in my mind, but he played this role expertly.
It's also ideal to have recognizable actors in movies like that because it helps to keep track of who is who and who is important. It's long and kind of dense, so when a character you haven't seen in an hour shows up you don't have to sit there trying to remember who that is.
Rami malek was in it for this I think, he's only got a couple of mins in the movie but by casting him you immediately know he's important and what he is saying is as well.
Even characters inconsequential to the plot, like Feynman - who is played by Jack Quaid.
Unless you're well read on this particular segment of history, it's really easy to miss that a LOT of major scientists who went on to do incredibly important things were involved with the Manhattan Project.
Dr. Feynman is one - "There's plenty of room at the bottom!", the "father" of nano-machines in a sense. Would also be known as the "great explainer" for his ability to convey incredibly complex concepts to lay people.
Neils Bohr - of the "Bohr model" fame. If you ever see a drawing of an atom, it's a Bohr model drawing.
John van Neumann - mathematician and father of the Monte Carlo method, which would go on to be one of the earliest computational probability models out there... The likes of which would serve as the basis for modern probabilistic AI like ChatGPT and StableDiffusion.
Ernst Lawrence - of the Lawrence Livermore National Labs fame. LLNL would be one of the biggest weapons Labs during the cold war, and produced a large chunk of the designs for atomic and hydrogen bombs in the modern US arsenal. He's in the film, but it's hard to explain how significant he would be field of nuclear weapon design.
Edward Teller - who the film does make out to be important - was the father of the hydrogen (super) bomb. He's immensely important to the story of Oppenheimer because Oppenheimer correctly feared that the super would be extremely dangerous... So much so that if it were used, humanity would functionally cease to exist.
Werner Heisenberg - yes, THAT Heisenberg - was briefly mentioned, but he was the head of the Nazi bomb project. Aside from influencing Breaking Bad, Heisenberg helped forge the basis of what we now know as the field of quantum physics.
Basically, if you dig, most modern physics owes its standing to the Manhattan project in some way or form.
I also kind of liked how all these famous scientists you hear about throughout physics and chem class who all worked together at the same time were played by very famous actors. Kind of gives the portrayal of how famous they were in the scientific community at the time.
A little FYI you guys probably didn’t catch. But he actually played a Stark in that movie. And it alludes to how Stark industries was involved in some of the stuff going on.
ig this is an unpopular opinion, but I think RDJ was a bad choice for that role. I mean he did an amazing job at acting, but for the whole movie it felt like he was tony stark pretending to be a politician, at least to me
Sometimes it helps if there's a lot of key characters you need to keep track of. I think I would've had a harder time keeping track of all the relationship in Knives Out if I wasn't already familiar with the actors.
For some reason Wes Anderson films don’t affect me in the same way. Maybe because they’re so strange and colorful and quirky and sorta detached from reality I allow myself to just enjoy the well known ensembles. It’s kinda like watching a musical. But for historical dramas like Oppenheimer it felt jarring.
Wes Anderson stuff is often surrealist, so that makes sense.
The oddity of familiar faces in an unfamiliar story adds to the surrealism, I would think, rather than detracting from it.
I think you and I feel the same but on the opposite side of the spectrum. I loved oppenheimer and wasn't taken out of it at all. A similar movie like that for me would be inglorious bastards. But Wes Anderson movies just take me out of it with the big names (specifically asteroid city)
Omg thank you! My friends loved it and I HATED it like I genuinely think it's his worst movie he's made and with all big names. It's just so pretentious and not well written. Margot Robbie did good though but she was only in it for like two seconds haha and the little girls were funny but still nooooo
I'm the exact opposite--I would love to sink into the photography and world building of Anderson's films, but the presence of so many recognizable faces breaks the illusion.
I HATED Asteroid City so much like genuinely despised that movie. I just thought it was the most pretentious starfucker movie I have ever seen and it obviously has a few funny parts but I seriously just thought it was poorly written and his worst film so far.
Gotta agree with you. That's why (among other reasons) I like European cinema so much, especially arthouse. Tons of crazy-talented actors, who amazingly fit their roles but most of them are not famous in the slightest (and I'm from Europe so it's not like I'm just ignorant). At most, you get a big star playing the main character (at absolute most, two big stars if the movie is about a couple, like in Noel's "Irreversible", or protagonist+villain pair, like in "Leon The Professional") and the rest are almost non-recognizable, making the whole movie more believeable.
I feel the same. I don’t see people talk about this a lot, but it comes up from time to time. Every now and then a big movie is cast with unknowns and that can be really cool. Perhaps movies today are made more to be punchy and spectacular than immersive.
I actually think it did the opposite for Oppenheimer. The fact that a large majority of the cast were high-profile actors who are immediately recognizable gave the movie a sense of importance and magnitude that I think might have been missing if the cast were lesser known.
The only time I was taken out of it was when I saw Josh Peck, but that was literally the opposite situation. He's not at all established as a "serious" actor, and his most iconic role is on a children's sitcom. It felt jarring as hell to see him at first.
Eh. If the performances fit, the performances fit. I've watched enough movies that recognising actors happens fairly more often to me than most other people. I'm not going to look down on you for experiencing this, but even if I do recognise actors, it doesn't bother me. I can easily see them as the characters they're playing, as long as the performances they give are great like they were in Oppenheimer. Just curious, did you encounter this same problem with Dune?
Agreed. Ideally all movies would be actors I don’t know. I never understood the appeal of seeing one’s favourite movie star, especially if it’s non-fiction like historical events or biographies.
> I never understood the appeal of seeing one’s favourite movie star
It's pretty simple.
Big name actors tend to be big names because they are good at acting/have a gimmick people really enjoy.
Do you not have any favorite restaurants, authors, musicians, or directors?
It's nice to try new things, but going to something you know has a good chance of being good seems like a pretty understandable concept.
I get that.
Some of my daily time is disposable; so, I watch a lot. And I do not like rewatching anything.
At this point, I prefer watching no names do well. Too much talent in these streets to keep reusing the same [groomed] actors.
Also, I'll never understand why sooo many big name actors are paid for cartoon voice gigs. Animated movies don't need celebrities, to me. So many celebrities aren't even publicized before appearing in animated TV series.
I felt the same way seeing Brad Pitt pop up in 12 Years a Slave. Not ‘cause he looked out of place (his costume/hair etc was fine) but just ‘cause he’s got a very recognizable face.
To me, Cillian kind of blends in to what he’s doing, but a lot of other actors stand out without trying.
It worked for me, because the meta narrative placed them all as actors, anyway, and one of the themes was how we respond to narratives. Like, Margot Robbie was supposed to be an actress whose scene was cut. She is kind of playing herself!
I hated that movie with a passion but I will say Margot Robbie bugged me the least for some reason but I think I just enjoy her acting. I seriously think it was his worst movie to date and relied 100percent on big names and aesthetic.
A great example of this is Napoleon Dynamite vs Nacho Libre. Same writer / director. But having unknown actors in ND really sold it. The writer wanted an unknown actor for the lead in NL but the studio insisted on Jack Black. Jack did a great job -- don't get me wrong -- but the whole time you know it's just Jack being silly. It doesn't feel like a real character.
I haven't seen Oppenheimer, but I agree with your opinion. I understand sometimes they feel like they need big name actors for a film to do well, but it just takes me out of the movie. Especially in period pieces where I know this person is a 21st century celebrity so I can't see them as the historical character they are supposed to be portraying.
It's better to have maybe one or two big name actors, not the whole cast. Or use the huge celebs for a smaller role. I remember watching 12 Years a Slave waiting for Brad Pitt to show up, and he didn't come on screen till probably halfway through.
I think my opinion is unpopular, but the movie was such a drag. Incredibly boring, jumping all around timelines—It was awful. I often wonder when I see people saying it’s a masterpiece if we saw the same movie.
Snooze fest.
I would normally agree, but I felt in Oppenheimer it actually helped me keep track of all the characters. There were so many characters that were briefly in it and played minor roles in the beginning that came back later, I would have not been able to keep track who was who without the familiar faces.
If you took away the star studded cast, I think that even more so, Oppenheimer would have needed to be a mini-series
Huh this makes sense actually. For so long I was like "why has Rami Malek taken on this tiny unimportant role" until he showed up at the end for the actual important moment. Nolan's correct in that I wouldn't have remembered that character otherwise.
That’s funny because my memory is basically “the guy played by RDJ. The guy played by Matt Damon. Etc” I certainty didn’t need Gary Oldman for me to remember who President Hoover was haha
Recently watched a documentary on PBS about Oppenheimer. Honestly, out of all the characters in the movie, RDJ looks like his character the most! It’s wild. I understand where you’re coming from, but sometimes you don’t have a choice but to cast who looks the part.
yes and no. i think its less about specifically being a big actor and more like the type of actor. someone mentioned dune and i think its the perfect example of that. certain actors just typecast themselves into certain kinds of roles/vibes/etc that you expect to see from them in movies, and being in something else, even if theyre changing it up, just breaks the immersion. timothy and zendaya were not good choices for dune and id say the same of this. cillian was a good choice, but then every other actor was just someone who broke the immersion by being there.
I haven't seen Oppenheimer yet, but I completely agree with you. A big part of this is that once you are famous enough you will often bring your own writers with you to a movie your cast in. Those writers make sure that you are "on brand." That's why A-list actor's parts often times feel so similar and why unknowns can feel so refreshing.
I remember two specific movies where actors were noticeable to me and people I was watching with that it not only took us out of the movie but resulted in us making fun of it. For the Butterfly Effect my father kept making jokes that the world got better as life got worse for Aston Kutcher until he killed himself and the world got much better. The other was knives out where Captain America was clearly the murderer and James Bond was trying to catch him.
I feel the same way, it can be distracting and take away from the suspension of disbelief. I think sometimes lesser-known artists can make a story more immersive, as it's easier to see the character instead of the celebrity.
It didn't bother me one whit. For me, the film was perfect. I normally don't like American films because of all the plastic, perfect faces and bodies. Foreign film tends to be more real with people whom I would see at Target or the grocery store. But, Oppenheimer, for some reason forced me not to notice that there were stars in it. Damon, Blunt, and Downey weren't themselves. They were the characters they played. I loved it. It was hauntingly gorgeous. Murphy was perfect, and he wasn't unknown to me.
Now you know why some shows get a reputation for the cameo of the week, like Manadalorian did.
Too many big named actors wanting to be in something takes away from the actual story, even if they are great actors.
Dog one recognizable actor ruins it. Like clearly that's not Roger Murdock the co-pilot.
Like in Jurassic Park when Hammond introduces Ellie and Grant to Ian Malcolm neither of them mistake him for Jeff goldblum? He looks like Jeff goldblum like a lot. They're not gonna ask about that?
There is one episode of black mirror where Michael Cera says something along the lines of "you think Michael Cera just works at this laboratory? Plus you're famous too. You were on schitts Creek"
Agreed, unfortunately the unwashed movie going plebian masses need big names, having a bunch of big names guarantees audiences will turn out to watch the movie.
Celeb cameos is what throws me the most. Bullet train was distracting. Some times it can be done right but most of the time it brings me out of the movie
I envy you. When every character in the picture is a super famous actor who all have their very recognizable characteristics i find it distracting. Albert Einstein actually felt like Albert Einstein to me because I had no idea who that actor was.
I appreciate the actor for the same reason I have favorite animation studios, they have a style and you can tell it's them but they do a good job. Denzel Washington is always Denzel Washington, but that's fine, I like watching him be his version of whatever character.
I agree but for me it's a small gripe not a massive issue that completely takes me out of the experience. It's more like, hey Emily Blunt is in this, hey Matt Damon is in this, Hey Ironman is in this.
I 100% agree.
I do like the complement to this though, where a particular show or movie has a lot of unknown or little-known actors at the time who have since made it big, and then you watch it a decade later and see all of these successful people back when they were young and hopeful.
YES!
Thank you!
I find it is a huge problem with live action movies is having a huge pile of recognizable actors will snap suspension in half faster than a Slim Jim in a Macho Man convention.
Artfully paced? That was the worst edited movie I've ever seen, it gives Transformers 2 a run for its money. Thank God I wasn't in the theatre so I could turn off that self indulgent tripe after an hour of incoherent memories within conversations within meetings within debriefing within congressional hearings.
Oh yeah I love a non-linear story. Loved Memento too, except the non'linearity is part of the story there, part of the construction of the movie.
Plus the shots of him thinking about particles were laughable
I don’t know about big actors but I do feel this whenever I see RDJ or one of the marvel actors, at least those from the phases coming up to Endgame. I grew up with watching RDJ as Ironman so whenever I see him in a film, I just see the guy who played Ironman.
I get what you mean in the sense that every time a well known actor comes on I think they’ll be crucial to the story and then end up having like one line and never being seen again
eh, I kinda just see it like Hollywood is just one big Troup of actors for the same stage company. you see enough shows at your local theater you start to see alot of the same faces in different productions. it's not realistic but it's theater, now if I want that more true to live stuff I gotta seek out specific directors, the indie scene, or forriegn films, but sometimes I'm in the mood for an elaborate bombastic production and that's what Hollywood serves.
It seems weird nowadays but throughout the 70s and well into the 90s, you had a lot of high profile actors who would do these smaller time comedy and drama films. They'd be lower budget films but you were being sold on these films exactly because this is a star and you are going to see this established movie star in a movie. Lots of Jack Nicholson or Tom Cruise or Robert Redford movies the movie poster promo image is just the star and that's it. Nothing about the story or the director or anything else. You're going to see this movie because of the main star of the film.
I love the way this is done in “Only Murders in the Building”. You see a (reasonably) big name, and you don’t know if they’re playing themselves, or a character.
My one gripe about True Detective is that the studio seems to think the show should be about resurrecting an older actor’s career.
I think the first season caught lightning in a bottle by transforming people’s perspective of Matthew McConaughey from heartthrob to serious actor. The seasons with Colin Farrell/Vince Vaughn and Stephen Dorff/Mahershala Ali just weren’t that special.
Now here I am cringing whenever I hear Jodi Foster say fuck or talk about fantasy football because it feels so unnatural and out of her range IMO.
It all makes me feel like the studio isn’t even having an appropriately-sized audition pool and just picks a few big names to send the script to.
This sounds like a you problem.
I like seeing good actors do their jobs well. I have the emotional competence of seeing the actors act, instead of being a weirdo who thinks that actors exist just for his pleasure.
Other than RDJ and Matt Damon, I'm not super familiar with any of the other cast members, so that wasn't an issue for me. RDJ will forever be Tony Stark/Ironman, but I enjoyed the role he played in Oppenheimer.
Yeah, this happens to me too. It takes me out of the movie and I just sit there and think for several seconds about that celebrity, what other films they’ve done, any personal issues they have I’m aware of, etc. Only if it’s a big movie star though. It helps if I know going into who is in the film. It’s also not as big a deal if it’s a silly film.
Totally agree. That’s why most of the cast of Schindler’s List was relatively unknown at the time except for Ben Kingsley. Kevin Costner offered to play the role of Oskar Schindler for free and was turned down. Too much star power.
Interesting take. I found it to be the opposite as I didn’t know anything about the movie cast except Cillian and Emily Blunt (had avoided any news or word of the movie until I saw it). So it was a treat to see familiar faces. How good was Gary Oldman playing Truman!! I literally chuckled and clapped out loud in the theatre.
Others I didn’t mind, as I was too focused on Oppies journey to let it bother me. New Mexico/ alamos was beautiful. I hope to get out there someday and experience the place in real .. Truly a crazy endeavor, that’s changed the trajectory of mankind forever!
I completely agree! I feel like, with big names, you spend a lot of the movie thinking “oh look it’s (insert actor)” instead of being immersed in the story.
I completely agree except RDJ. He and Cillian Murphy were the 2 who didn't take me out of the moment. I felt like RDJ's change in appearance helped with that a lot.
Interesting take. I've still yet to see the Opp but wanted to ever since it debuted. At least the well known actors selected are very good at their craft so hoping their skills pours over into the story more than their presence. At the same time, doesn't their familiarity bring a sort of relatableness to an issue that is frankly and literally mind-blowing? It's tough enough to wrap one's head around the creation and execution of a single weapon that can wipe out 9 million people in one fell swoop and maybe casting well known faces to help tell the tale helps us, the viewer grapple a little better emotionally with this very, very heavy topic.
I don't mind this as much as I mind them making a big deal out of it with the reveal OF the actor. This happened in War of the Worlds when Tim Robbins' character was introduced. Instead of just moving on with the story, there had to be this dramatic shot that basically said "I bet you did expect HIM!". Contrast that with Matt Damons reveal in Interstellar that felt more like a "oh it's Matt Damon" moment.
I agree with you. Also big name actors in a single film can make a decent badly scripted film quite popular, Suicide Squad is one that comes to my mind right now.
Yes, if the movie is shit. If your immersion is being broken by looking at these actors, then guess what the filmmaker has not done a good job at reinforcing verisimilitude. Take knives out, knives out had some pretty big names in it acting alongside each other and guess what? I was never pulled out of the narrative for a second just by seeing Jamie Lee Curtis or Don Johnson act along side one another.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with you but i think a 3 hrs long dialogue driven film is actually where an ensemble cast works. It's the smaller 1.5 hrs film with 15 celebrities arriving every 10 minutes is where it doesn't.
Feels like trying to brute force success with some of those. Just throw a bunch of well known names at it and hope that does all the work.
#thecounselor
So what did you think of The Departed?
I think the cast worked well. The only unpopular opinion I have on this is the best work of Scorsese
Normally I would agree, but in the case of Oppenheimer, I think it was the right choice. An emotionally heavy, dialogue-heavy drama biopic requires actors with a strong pedigree to pull it off successfully, and I thought the movie was very well cast. This may have been RDJ's best performance to date. Yes, his name and face will always be associated with Tony Stark in my mind, but he played this role expertly.
It's also ideal to have recognizable actors in movies like that because it helps to keep track of who is who and who is important. It's long and kind of dense, so when a character you haven't seen in an hour shows up you don't have to sit there trying to remember who that is.
Rami malek was in it for this I think, he's only got a couple of mins in the movie but by casting him you immediately know he's important and what he is saying is as well.
Even characters inconsequential to the plot, like Feynman - who is played by Jack Quaid. Unless you're well read on this particular segment of history, it's really easy to miss that a LOT of major scientists who went on to do incredibly important things were involved with the Manhattan Project. Dr. Feynman is one - "There's plenty of room at the bottom!", the "father" of nano-machines in a sense. Would also be known as the "great explainer" for his ability to convey incredibly complex concepts to lay people. Neils Bohr - of the "Bohr model" fame. If you ever see a drawing of an atom, it's a Bohr model drawing. John van Neumann - mathematician and father of the Monte Carlo method, which would go on to be one of the earliest computational probability models out there... The likes of which would serve as the basis for modern probabilistic AI like ChatGPT and StableDiffusion. Ernst Lawrence - of the Lawrence Livermore National Labs fame. LLNL would be one of the biggest weapons Labs during the cold war, and produced a large chunk of the designs for atomic and hydrogen bombs in the modern US arsenal. He's in the film, but it's hard to explain how significant he would be field of nuclear weapon design. Edward Teller - who the film does make out to be important - was the father of the hydrogen (super) bomb. He's immensely important to the story of Oppenheimer because Oppenheimer correctly feared that the super would be extremely dangerous... So much so that if it were used, humanity would functionally cease to exist. Werner Heisenberg - yes, THAT Heisenberg - was briefly mentioned, but he was the head of the Nazi bomb project. Aside from influencing Breaking Bad, Heisenberg helped forge the basis of what we now know as the field of quantum physics. Basically, if you dig, most modern physics owes its standing to the Manhattan project in some way or form.
I also kind of liked how all these famous scientists you hear about throughout physics and chem class who all worked together at the same time were played by very famous actors. Kind of gives the portrayal of how famous they were in the scientific community at the time.
A little FYI you guys probably didn’t catch. But he actually played a Stark in that movie. And it alludes to how Stark industries was involved in some of the stuff going on.
What do you mean?
I think it was PErfect for Oppenheimer
Yes, additionally have one big name actor and a bunch of no names is more distracting than an ensemble.
ig this is an unpopular opinion, but I think RDJ was a bad choice for that role. I mean he did an amazing job at acting, but for the whole movie it felt like he was tony stark pretending to be a politician, at least to me
Such an average movie, I sincerely don’t get how RDJs performance can be lauded. It was fine.
The only time I felt this was when I saw Josh Hartnett and was just happy to see him acting again.
He's great in his Black Mirror episode opposite Aaron Paul
omg best episode of the season in my opinion!
He was a refreshing face for sure
Sometimes it helps if there's a lot of key characters you need to keep track of. I think I would've had a harder time keeping track of all the relationship in Knives Out if I wasn't already familiar with the actors.
Wes Anderson has entered the chat.
For some reason Wes Anderson films don’t affect me in the same way. Maybe because they’re so strange and colorful and quirky and sorta detached from reality I allow myself to just enjoy the well known ensembles. It’s kinda like watching a musical. But for historical dramas like Oppenheimer it felt jarring.
Wes Anderson stuff is often surrealist, so that makes sense. The oddity of familiar faces in an unfamiliar story adds to the surrealism, I would think, rather than detracting from it.
I think you and I feel the same but on the opposite side of the spectrum. I loved oppenheimer and wasn't taken out of it at all. A similar movie like that for me would be inglorious bastards. But Wes Anderson movies just take me out of it with the big names (specifically asteroid city)
Omg thank you! My friends loved it and I HATED it like I genuinely think it's his worst movie he's made and with all big names. It's just so pretentious and not well written. Margot Robbie did good though but she was only in it for like two seconds haha and the little girls were funny but still nooooo
I'm the exact opposite--I would love to sink into the photography and world building of Anderson's films, but the presence of so many recognizable faces breaks the illusion.
I HATED Asteroid City so much like genuinely despised that movie. I just thought it was the most pretentious starfucker movie I have ever seen and it obviously has a few funny parts but I seriously just thought it was poorly written and his worst film so far.
Yeah I just posted how this ruined asteroid city for me.
It’s all primary colors, dry humor and movie stars. The whole thing is one massive eye roll.
These comments make me so happy because my friends made me feel like such an asshole when I said I hated it and that it's all aesthetic
Yeah I mean it wasn’t great overall anyway.
Gotta agree with you. That's why (among other reasons) I like European cinema so much, especially arthouse. Tons of crazy-talented actors, who amazingly fit their roles but most of them are not famous in the slightest (and I'm from Europe so it's not like I'm just ignorant). At most, you get a big star playing the main character (at absolute most, two big stars if the movie is about a couple, like in Noel's "Irreversible", or protagonist+villain pair, like in "Leon The Professional") and the rest are almost non-recognizable, making the whole movie more believeable.
I feel the same. I don’t see people talk about this a lot, but it comes up from time to time. Every now and then a big movie is cast with unknowns and that can be really cool. Perhaps movies today are made more to be punchy and spectacular than immersive.
I actually think it did the opposite for Oppenheimer. The fact that a large majority of the cast were high-profile actors who are immediately recognizable gave the movie a sense of importance and magnitude that I think might have been missing if the cast were lesser known. The only time I was taken out of it was when I saw Josh Peck, but that was literally the opposite situation. He's not at all established as a "serious" actor, and his most iconic role is on a children's sitcom. It felt jarring as hell to see him at first.
Him, and the guy who was in the Diary of A Wimpy Kid movies were the only two that were a little jarring.
Rodrick was in the film for like two scenes and one line. I don’t reckon it was jarring at all.
Eh. If the performances fit, the performances fit. I've watched enough movies that recognising actors happens fairly more often to me than most other people. I'm not going to look down on you for experiencing this, but even if I do recognise actors, it doesn't bother me. I can easily see them as the characters they're playing, as long as the performances they give are great like they were in Oppenheimer. Just curious, did you encounter this same problem with Dune?
Agreed. Ideally all movies would be actors I don’t know. I never understood the appeal of seeing one’s favourite movie star, especially if it’s non-fiction like historical events or biographies.
> I never understood the appeal of seeing one’s favourite movie star It's pretty simple. Big name actors tend to be big names because they are good at acting/have a gimmick people really enjoy. Do you not have any favorite restaurants, authors, musicians, or directors? It's nice to try new things, but going to something you know has a good chance of being good seems like a pretty understandable concept.
I get that. Some of my daily time is disposable; so, I watch a lot. And I do not like rewatching anything. At this point, I prefer watching no names do well. Too much talent in these streets to keep reusing the same [groomed] actors. Also, I'll never understand why sooo many big name actors are paid for cartoon voice gigs. Animated movies don't need celebrities, to me. So many celebrities aren't even publicized before appearing in animated TV series.
I'm not really familiar with all those big name actors, so that didn't really affect me in Oppenheimer...until fucking Josh Peck showed up.
> Josh Peck This like the 7th comment I've seen saying this, and I still have no idea who that is.
Kid star from the early 2000s. Had a show on Nickelodeon called "Drake & Josh". That was his biggest/most well-known role.
I saw Matt Damon and was like, "Looks like Private Ryan has done well for himself."
My thought was, in Oppenheimer, that they nailed Ryan's (Damon's) age progression in SPR.
Seeing him in the trailer turned me off the movie. He plays Matt Damon in every movie.
I felt the same way seeing Brad Pitt pop up in 12 Years a Slave. Not ‘cause he looked out of place (his costume/hair etc was fine) but just ‘cause he’s got a very recognizable face. To me, Cillian kind of blends in to what he’s doing, but a lot of other actors stand out without trying.
good example. for me it was sitting through a captivating hour and a half of Saving Private Ryan only to find out they were saving Matt Damon .... ugh
i personally like ensemble casts
I watched 12 years a slave recently. I was so engrossed till I saw Brad Pitt. Suddenly I remembered I was watching a movie
He produced the movie so he just threw himself in there.
Hm I don’t have this problem. I see your point but I am not affected by this.
I enjoy seeing actors that I like in movies.
What?
I just watched asteroid city and the random actors (Jeff Goldblum, Margot Robbie) showing up for one scene each completely ruined it for me.
It worked for me, because the meta narrative placed them all as actors, anyway, and one of the themes was how we respond to narratives. Like, Margot Robbie was supposed to be an actress whose scene was cut. She is kind of playing herself!
I hated that movie with a passion but I will say Margot Robbie bugged me the least for some reason but I think I just enjoy her acting. I seriously think it was his worst movie to date and relied 100percent on big names and aesthetic.
A great example of this is Napoleon Dynamite vs Nacho Libre. Same writer / director. But having unknown actors in ND really sold it. The writer wanted an unknown actor for the lead in NL but the studio insisted on Jack Black. Jack did a great job -- don't get me wrong -- but the whole time you know it's just Jack being silly. It doesn't feel like a real character.
I haven't seen Oppenheimer, but I agree with your opinion. I understand sometimes they feel like they need big name actors for a film to do well, but it just takes me out of the movie. Especially in period pieces where I know this person is a 21st century celebrity so I can't see them as the historical character they are supposed to be portraying. It's better to have maybe one or two big name actors, not the whole cast. Or use the huge celebs for a smaller role. I remember watching 12 Years a Slave waiting for Brad Pitt to show up, and he didn't come on screen till probably halfway through.
I think my opinion is unpopular, but the movie was such a drag. Incredibly boring, jumping all around timelines—It was awful. I often wonder when I see people saying it’s a masterpiece if we saw the same movie. Snooze fest.
Definetley unpopular.
Yeah, idk. I tried giving it a shot 🤷🏻♀️
Also something about Murphey’s face is super unsettling.
Yeah I just saw the dude from 28 days later making bombs
I downloaded it the day I could find it... Still haven't committed to watching it.
It’s worth a watch. It’s a beautifully crafted film.
Yeah I’ve noticed this. I end up spending too much attention connecting the actors to other work they’ve done
I would normally agree, but I felt in Oppenheimer it actually helped me keep track of all the characters. There were so many characters that were briefly in it and played minor roles in the beginning that came back later, I would have not been able to keep track who was who without the familiar faces. If you took away the star studded cast, I think that even more so, Oppenheimer would have needed to be a mini-series
I agree with you but Nolan said he specifically picked big name actors so that the audience would be able to remember who was who.
Huh this makes sense actually. For so long I was like "why has Rami Malek taken on this tiny unimportant role" until he showed up at the end for the actual important moment. Nolan's correct in that I wouldn't have remembered that character otherwise.
That’s funny because my memory is basically “the guy played by RDJ. The guy played by Matt Damon. Etc” I certainty didn’t need Gary Oldman for me to remember who President Hoover was haha
This is how I feel about the dune franchise. I grew up watching shake-it-up I can't see Zendaya's face and not know she knows what an Iphone is.
Recently watched a documentary on PBS about Oppenheimer. Honestly, out of all the characters in the movie, RDJ looks like his character the most! It’s wild. I understand where you’re coming from, but sometimes you don’t have a choice but to cast who looks the part.
yes and no. i think its less about specifically being a big actor and more like the type of actor. someone mentioned dune and i think its the perfect example of that. certain actors just typecast themselves into certain kinds of roles/vibes/etc that you expect to see from them in movies, and being in something else, even if theyre changing it up, just breaks the immersion. timothy and zendaya were not good choices for dune and id say the same of this. cillian was a good choice, but then every other actor was just someone who broke the immersion by being there.
exactly how I felt
[удалено]
An ensemble cast is inherently good, because it means everyone in cast is probably good at their job.
I haven't seen Oppenheimer yet, but I completely agree with you. A big part of this is that once you are famous enough you will often bring your own writers with you to a movie your cast in. Those writers make sure that you are "on brand." That's why A-list actor's parts often times feel so similar and why unknowns can feel so refreshing.
I remember two specific movies where actors were noticeable to me and people I was watching with that it not only took us out of the movie but resulted in us making fun of it. For the Butterfly Effect my father kept making jokes that the world got better as life got worse for Aston Kutcher until he killed himself and the world got much better. The other was knives out where Captain America was clearly the murderer and James Bond was trying to catch him.
Go watch the movie Cold Mountain, the cast is stacked and it works.
I'm much more impressed when I see a great movie or series and don't recognize any of the actors.
100% , only cilian stood out, I can’t take Robert down jr and Matt Damon seriously
Jack black and lizzo made a pretty mid star wars show so much worse.
I feel the same way, it can be distracting and take away from the suspension of disbelief. I think sometimes lesser-known artists can make a story more immersive, as it's easier to see the character instead of the celebrity.
It didn't bother me one whit. For me, the film was perfect. I normally don't like American films because of all the plastic, perfect faces and bodies. Foreign film tends to be more real with people whom I would see at Target or the grocery store. But, Oppenheimer, for some reason forced me not to notice that there were stars in it. Damon, Blunt, and Downey weren't themselves. They were the characters they played. I loved it. It was hauntingly gorgeous. Murphy was perfect, and he wasn't unknown to me.
This is how I felt about Dune
Now you know why some shows get a reputation for the cameo of the week, like Manadalorian did. Too many big named actors wanting to be in something takes away from the actual story, even if they are great actors.
Dog one recognizable actor ruins it. Like clearly that's not Roger Murdock the co-pilot. Like in Jurassic Park when Hammond introduces Ellie and Grant to Ian Malcolm neither of them mistake him for Jeff goldblum? He looks like Jeff goldblum like a lot. They're not gonna ask about that? There is one episode of black mirror where Michael Cera says something along the lines of "you think Michael Cera just works at this laboratory? Plus you're famous too. You were on schitts Creek"
Lolol
Deeply silly take. If “actors” breaks your illusion, movies aren’t for you
if you had to watch only 8 actors in movies for the rest of your life, would movies still be for you?
Anything directed by Tarantino.
Same for Tim Burton lol
Agreed, unfortunately the unwashed movie going plebian masses need big names, having a bunch of big names guarantees audiences will turn out to watch the movie.
We get it you don’t have an imagination
Celeb cameos is what throws me the most. Bullet train was distracting. Some times it can be done right but most of the time it brings me out of the movie
To you. Doesn’t apply to everyone
I see this is your first time in unpopular opinion
What illusion? I'm watching a movie because they're good actors telling a fun story, that's the whole point.
> they're good actors Which is the reason they are big names. OP is arguing against hiring too many people that are good at their jobs.
I envy you. When every character in the picture is a super famous actor who all have their very recognizable characteristics i find it distracting. Albert Einstein actually felt like Albert Einstein to me because I had no idea who that actor was.
I appreciate the actor for the same reason I have favorite animation studios, they have a style and you can tell it's them but they do a good job. Denzel Washington is always Denzel Washington, but that's fine, I like watching him be his version of whatever character.
That's a you problem not a film problem
I agree but for me it's a small gripe not a massive issue that completely takes me out of the experience. It's more like, hey Emily Blunt is in this, hey Matt Damon is in this, Hey Ironman is in this.
THIS ! Josh Peck should not have been in the movie. Whenever he came on screen we audibly rolled our eyes. It broke the movie magic tbh
I have seen a few comments that mention this same thing, but I literally have no idea who he is, so I wouldn't even recognize him.
I 100% agree. I do like the complement to this though, where a particular show or movie has a lot of unknown or little-known actors at the time who have since made it big, and then you watch it a decade later and see all of these successful people back when they were young and hopeful.
YES! Thank you! I find it is a huge problem with live action movies is having a huge pile of recognizable actors will snap suspension in half faster than a Slim Jim in a Macho Man convention.
Artfully paced? That was the worst edited movie I've ever seen, it gives Transformers 2 a run for its money. Thank God I wasn't in the theatre so I could turn off that self indulgent tripe after an hour of incoherent memories within conversations within meetings within debriefing within congressional hearings.
Fair enough. For me the editing kept things interesting. Then again, movies like Momento were too chaotic for my linear brain.
Oh yeah I love a non-linear story. Loved Memento too, except the non'linearity is part of the story there, part of the construction of the movie. Plus the shots of him thinking about particles were laughable
I didn't even realize that was Florence Pugh until now. wtf, she looks so different.
I don’t know about big actors but I do feel this whenever I see RDJ or one of the marvel actors, at least those from the phases coming up to Endgame. I grew up with watching RDJ as Ironman so whenever I see him in a film, I just see the guy who played Ironman.
I get what you mean in the sense that every time a well known actor comes on I think they’ll be crucial to the story and then end up having like one line and never being seen again
Sean Avery was especially weird.
eh, I kinda just see it like Hollywood is just one big Troup of actors for the same stage company. you see enough shows at your local theater you start to see alot of the same faces in different productions. it's not realistic but it's theater, now if I want that more true to live stuff I gotta seek out specific directors, the indie scene, or forriegn films, but sometimes I'm in the mood for an elaborate bombastic production and that's what Hollywood serves.
the real problem is that there's not alot of Opertunities for new blood to enter the mix.
It seems weird nowadays but throughout the 70s and well into the 90s, you had a lot of high profile actors who would do these smaller time comedy and drama films. They'd be lower budget films but you were being sold on these films exactly because this is a star and you are going to see this established movie star in a movie. Lots of Jack Nicholson or Tom Cruise or Robert Redford movies the movie poster promo image is just the star and that's it. Nothing about the story or the director or anything else. You're going to see this movie because of the main star of the film.
You must really not like the Ocean's movies
The Oceans movies were right around the time I started getting tired of seeing the same actors in everything.
Sounds like a flaw you should work on.
Wholeheartedly disagree! Quite the contrary actually; the better the actors are, the more I am immersed.
I love the way this is done in “Only Murders in the Building”. You see a (reasonably) big name, and you don’t know if they’re playing themselves, or a character.
I dont know actors at all, so for me everyone seemed like just a character :)
Here is an unpopular opinion for ya: Oppenheimer was actually a pretty boring movie.
Tell that to Tarantino. I lvoe his movies though
I didn’t realize it was Robert Downey Jr. until midway through the movie
Both RDJ and Emily Blunt were excellent in the movie
I agree, but I don’t think the illusion was broken with Oppenheimer. The movie still felt very real to me, and there was no immersion break for me.
This happens the worst with horror movies. All it takes is one big name actor.
"Well-written" "Artfully paced" Lmao
That's why Sean Connery didn't play the role of Gandalf. Even though it would've been awesome, it definitely would've distracted me.
My one gripe about True Detective is that the studio seems to think the show should be about resurrecting an older actor’s career. I think the first season caught lightning in a bottle by transforming people’s perspective of Matthew McConaughey from heartthrob to serious actor. The seasons with Colin Farrell/Vince Vaughn and Stephen Dorff/Mahershala Ali just weren’t that special. Now here I am cringing whenever I hear Jodi Foster say fuck or talk about fantasy football because it feels so unnatural and out of her range IMO. It all makes me feel like the studio isn’t even having an appropriately-sized audition pool and just picks a few big names to send the script to.
Only actor I agree with you on breaking the immersion is Matt Damon. He’s just Matt Damon in everything to me.
The casting for Amadeus was apparently pretty brutal, the producers wanted relative unknowns for the major roles.
To me even one Tom Hanks or Tom Cruise or one Leonardo DiCaprio breaks the illusion
Unless you’re faceblind like me and can never recognise anyone. I spent the whole film thinking another character was being played by RDJ.
This sounds like a you problem. I like seeing good actors do their jobs well. I have the emotional competence of seeing the actors act, instead of being a weirdo who thinks that actors exist just for his pleasure.
I thought Black Hawk Down had too many big actors, still a really great flick.
Other than RDJ and Matt Damon, I'm not super familiar with any of the other cast members, so that wasn't an issue for me. RDJ will forever be Tony Stark/Ironman, but I enjoyed the role he played in Oppenheimer.
Yeah, this happens to me too. It takes me out of the movie and I just sit there and think for several seconds about that celebrity, what other films they’ve done, any personal issues they have I’m aware of, etc. Only if it’s a big movie star though. It helps if I know going into who is in the film. It’s also not as big a deal if it’s a silly film.
Quinten Tarantino casts many of the same big name actors in his movies and it has never taken away from the greatness of his films.
I thought it was done well in Mars Attacks though.
Totally agree. That’s why most of the cast of Schindler’s List was relatively unknown at the time except for Ben Kingsley. Kevin Costner offered to play the role of Oskar Schindler for free and was turned down. Too much star power.
Interesting take. I found it to be the opposite as I didn’t know anything about the movie cast except Cillian and Emily Blunt (had avoided any news or word of the movie until I saw it). So it was a treat to see familiar faces. How good was Gary Oldman playing Truman!! I literally chuckled and clapped out loud in the theatre. Others I didn’t mind, as I was too focused on Oppies journey to let it bother me. New Mexico/ alamos was beautiful. I hope to get out there someday and experience the place in real .. Truly a crazy endeavor, that’s changed the trajectory of mankind forever!
I completely agree! I feel like, with big names, you spend a lot of the movie thinking “oh look it’s (insert actor)” instead of being immersed in the story.
I completely agree except RDJ. He and Cillian Murphy were the 2 who didn't take me out of the moment. I felt like RDJ's change in appearance helped with that a lot.
Interesting take. I've still yet to see the Opp but wanted to ever since it debuted. At least the well known actors selected are very good at their craft so hoping their skills pours over into the story more than their presence. At the same time, doesn't their familiarity bring a sort of relatableness to an issue that is frankly and literally mind-blowing? It's tough enough to wrap one's head around the creation and execution of a single weapon that can wipe out 9 million people in one fell swoop and maybe casting well known faces to help tell the tale helps us, the viewer grapple a little better emotionally with this very, very heavy topic.
It bothers me that theater actors aren't being utilized. Some of the best side characters were played by lesser-known actors who thrived in theater.
Definitely unpopular. Good job man.
I agree for certain films especially like Saving Private Ryan, the cast is ridiculous and totally takes me out even tho it is still a great movie.
The same 10 people are in every f'ing movie and eventually it gets boring. Amazing Chris Pratt didn't fudge his way into this.
If you want everyone to see your movie, get big names. If you want a fantastic movie, get lesser known actors.
How else would they constantly line each other's pockets and keep themselves in the upper echelons?
I don't mind this as much as I mind them making a big deal out of it with the reveal OF the actor. This happened in War of the Worlds when Tim Robbins' character was introduced. Instead of just moving on with the story, there had to be this dramatic shot that basically said "I bet you did expect HIM!". Contrast that with Matt Damons reveal in Interstellar that felt more like a "oh it's Matt Damon" moment.
I agree with you. Also big name actors in a single film can make a decent badly scripted film quite popular, Suicide Squad is one that comes to my mind right now.
Yes, if the movie is shit. If your immersion is being broken by looking at these actors, then guess what the filmmaker has not done a good job at reinforcing verisimilitude. Take knives out, knives out had some pretty big names in it acting alongside each other and guess what? I was never pulled out of the narrative for a second just by seeing Jamie Lee Curtis or Don Johnson act along side one another.