Crushes everything she does and has since boogie nights. Her track record is stunning. Does any female compare?
is Julianne Moore easily the best actress alive?
- Thread starter Ed MOTHERFUCKING G
- Start date
its Cate Blanchette
Last edited:
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Did Meryl Streep die?
Cate Blanchette is my current queen of the screen. Meryl Streep still got the chops, but the generation just needed a new leader.
Julianne Moore is up there, tho. I think her movies might be better.
Julianne Moore is up there, tho. I think her movies might be better.
It's Cate to me. Meryl is still dope but at this point she gets accolades just for breathing. Julianne is also dope tho. Jennifer Lawrence probably belongs in that conversation along with Marion Cotlliard as well. Also Viola Davis who is excellent in any and everything she does.
NobodyReally
Superstar
I don't know if I have a queen right now. Off the bat though, my go-to actresses are Charlize Theron, Cate Blanchett, Viola Davis, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, and Julia Roberts. I like Jennifer Lawrence & Scarlett Jo too, but their acting is hit or miss for me.
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
If we going for best leading ladies in their prime I gotta go with Natalie Portman. She delivered terrible Star Wars trilogy dialogue almost convincingly.
“You’re a good person don’t do this!”
I believed her even though the line is so terrible. She on hiatus right now but can crush a role at a moments notice.
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Meryl just got nominated, she is doing more than just breathing breh. They gave P. Arquette her award cause she is like Jordan and they are sick of her being the MVP.
Yeah but she got nominated for being meh in a meh flick. Which is my point about her getting acclaim for breathing. Into the Woods was adequate and her performance was adequate but really oscar worthy? Arquette was really good in her role and it was a better movie :whoknows:
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
19 noms and counting, most ever for a female. doubt anyone else mentioned will ever reach that. If you get nominated don't you deserve it? The academy decides, not anyone else.
*slightly off topic
My gawd that woman is fine
I'm not saying she isn't a great actress breh. She's better than most guys and no doubt she deserves the bulk of them but lets not act like the academy doesn't nominate people on the strength of their name at times rather than the strength of the performance. The academy can make the decision but that doesn't mean the audience can't have a separate decision and have the argument for said opinion be just as valid especially when you're talking about a governing body that fully admits they don't always see each movie nominated and will at times just nominate people on the strength of their name and reputation. It's been chronicled before and the hollywood reporter chronicled it very well this year.
It's perfectly fine for us to disagree with them, they aren't infallible
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
It's art so there is no best really, just a myriad of opinions. And we cannot use audience consensus because no one is able to compile such information about the general public. Therefore, Oscar noms are the best stat to use regardless of how they arrive at it. So poo pooing a nomination is worthless, because that is just some cross section of the public not the entire public consensus. You saying, "She doesn't deserve it." doesn't make it so is my point. She got it, the end.
Then what's the point of discussing the oscars then? Or any awards show? There's a reason we have threads on here for the oscars and the golden globes and its not just for the fukkery, we have actual discussions as to whether we agree or disagree with the nominees or the recipients and its something that has gone on for decades breh. It's the reason deadline, entertainment weekly, hollywood reporter, etc all do a snubs list or a shocked list the day after nominations are announced or after winners are announced. It all contributes to the discussion of film and the discussion of merit and the process of nominations and wanting more transparency in the process. I don't see anything wrong with that at all especially since you're right when you say it's all opinion. I can use that same logic you used when you said the only reason Arquette got it is because they were tired of giving it to Streep as opposed to her actually deserving it and possibly doing a better job than Meryl.
Anything that is put in the public space and that invites discussion and analysis is going to be discussed and analyzed. It's part of the fun and if I or someone else doesn't feel like she deserved the nomination for that particular role then that's just as valid as you saying she did or someone else saying she did. To me, she got it on the strength of her name not the performance but it takes nothing away from her greatness. If that were the case then it wouldn't be understood by damn near all oscar watchers at this point that actors will get awards for one performance when its really the academy awarding them for a great performance they overlooked in the past or for a great body of work.