Why does acting in modern movies suck so much compared to acting in the past? Pic related...

I TOKKED to Barzini

Attached: LukeIamYourGodfather.jpg (649x599, 178K)

Why would any of that happen today? Why pretend like capeshit studios make mafia/family dramas?
There have been made way slower films since Godfather, just not as Hollywood blockbusters ofcourse.

Wow, look at all the darkness and monochromatic colour palettes. That means it's good, right??

You answered yourself with your last sentence.

Just like 99% of acting in all films was shit back then, so it is now.

The only thing that has changed, is that viewing habits are drastically changing due to demographic changes (zoomers) and that major studios (all 3 of them) are essentially only making franchise flicks, because thats where the money is.

Acting skill has nothing to do with it. You can have the best actor and not be able to properly use him, if the script is shit, or the director is an incompetent retard only hired to direct Thor 18, or Star Wars episode 2.

2020 is the year of retribution.
It's the first year in quite a while with the mainstream blockbusters being largely non capeshit. Dune, Avatar 2, Godzilla vs Kong, new Nolan blockbuster, Bond 25, new Top Gun and more, while capeshit studios will enter that phase of releasing side side projects and 12th sequels where even the standard normalfag casuals slowly not being able to keep up and slowly losing interest. Couple that with the fact that nustarshit is already dying and that can be great hope for the industry to finally start turning.

And those are only the big Hollywood blockbusters we are talking

>tfw not being an italoamerican gangster and protect your family and honor and be feared and respected

Attached: Don-Vito-Corleone-Poster-2.jpg (3456x3456, 1.03M)

You had me until you said Bond 25. Otherwise you literally just listed the only films Im actually looking forward to.

Method acting has fallen out of favor with a lot of acting teachers because it traumatizes people and makes them kill themselves. It makes for top tier performances, obviously, but coaches/directors/etc. no longer have that 20th century bohemian obsession with "true art" that makes them think a very well done series of scenes justify driving some idiot actor insane.

Marlon Brando was the literal opposite of "method acting" though

>Dune, Avatar 2, Godzilla vs Kong, new Nolan blockbuster, Bond 25, new Top Gun
All of these are capeshit though? None of those flicks will elicit any emotional response from the viewers, it's specifically made to be a spectacle, nothing else.

method acting was very popular back then. Also modern movies have been dumbbed down to appeal to insectoid chinks

We're talking blockbusters user. I'm sure Dune will be slow and methodical, if not even slower than Godfather in it's pacing.

There' s no method acting in Godfather

Yeah, he was also acting for 1100 years before le spaghetti meme tho

I think acting has gotten better but writing just sucks now, I mean that whole scene seemed well acted because of how natural the dialogue felt

Nowadays, most hollywood writers are harvard or yale grads and they write like it, way too clever or contrived or indie writers who write like idiots

I mean look at something like Manchester by the Sea which is extremely well acted and the dialogue feels natural, its rare nowadays

they were all method actors, Brando was the one who made method acting popular
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting#List_of_method_actors

This, writing has gone to absolute shit these days.
I can't think of any quotable films made in the past 5 years.

You are posting a movie from the fucking 70s, literally the golden age of explanation movies that are known for their shit acting. You couldn't have picked a worst fucking example. And also the Godfather 2 is often regarded as one of the best moives, no fucking shit you won't be seeing your average flick be on the same tier. your post is so fucking stupid it makes me mad, goddamn you are stupid

Attached: 1502990278623.jpg (229x231, 6K)

>the writing is good if it has quotable lines
big yikes

0/10 try harder

Sorry I should have said memorable instead

>70s is the era of explanation films
>they had horrible acting

these are facts deal with it even if it hurts your feelings

Explanation movies?

one of the redeeming qualities of 2049 was its cinematography, which at the very least was interesting. It did attract a lot of attention to itself, but for exposition it is way better for the camera to do the work than dialogue... still, plot-wise its only a flick just like the first one anyway

The very fact you think the Godfather is badly acted just proves my point
The whole modern conception of acting is so uttelry inferior its a joke

That scene insists upon itself

>The very fact you think the Godfather is badly acted just proves my point

are you retarded, I said the opposite
>And also the Godfather 2 is often regarded as one of the best moives, no fucking shit you won't be seeing your average flick be on the same tier.

you are just a dumb person, so stupid and dumb

Its decent compared to films these days but not even close to the original in terms of cinematography, writing, acting, themes, and so on.

Whats with closeups? they are everywhere, and they are overused. Is it because actors nowadays are worse skillwise? Take Lawrence of Arabia's first scene with the match, the camera is mostly stationery and all four men are in the composition, despite the focus being on Lawrence obviously. It is O'Toole that manages to shift that focus on him through his acting charisma. Also, it looks much better.

>You are posting a movie from the fucking 70s, literally the golden age of explanation movies that are known for their shit acting. You couldn't have picked a worst fucking example.

Here's your last (You)
Anime posting faggot

Acting is just about the same, the difference is that most movies today don't have wide shots for longer than a few seconds. Those wide, static shots let you see what everyone is doing, and allows everyone to interact organically in the scene instead of just having close up after close up with heavily scripted and planned interactions.

method acting is a meme, great actors have great imagination

The writing is better in BR2049, although Fancher was and is a hack.

is English your second language? no way you are this stupid. now can get the fuck out of my board smooth brain

Literal autist

why is everything so fucking empty in 2049?
Did the people stop believing in furniture or what?

Minimalist Ikea aesthetic because it's the future

Earth is literally dead. The ecosystem has died, there is no direct sunlight, extremely harsh environments with constant dust which you can't look through 5 feet, people were on the verge of dying of starvation so a lot of them moved Off-World to the 9 other planets and there was a technological blackout.

>the writing is better in 2049
"No"

Lazy set design
Having an apartment decked out with photographs, furniture, art, bottles of alcohol, food, ect. to make it look lived in is too much work these days.

You really think it's because they were lazy to put props onto the set?
There is furniture and bottles of alcohol and food in K's apartment, it's just that he's a new replicant slave model, not a human slob. I mean his only companion in his apartment is his fucking holographic projection, there is no mess to be made.

Compared to the original, yeah its lazy

Do you think they were not able to put even more things in the frame if they wanted to? Do you think a film is better the more things you shove in frame? Should've Deakins put even more blinds on windows with smoke filled interiors and just make a complete rehash of the first one?
It would make no sense to do any of those things in that narrative, and considering that absolutely every scene was made on an actual set with beyond absurd lighting setups it's pretty retarded to say they were just "lazy" to do it

Attached: bfs_br2049ss4.jpg (1200x800, 334K)

the problem is talentless actors making it to the top, a great actor can even take a capeshit role and elevated to something, like michael shannon with his interpretation of general zod.

Attached: generalzod.jpg (600x375, 56K)

Attached: br2049.jpg (960x1225, 492K)

Attached: actual valid BR comparison.jpg (960x800, 379K)

Attached: 1522192710055.jpg (682x1442, 342K)

Or they are TV writers who can't think otside of clichés

soul vs soulless

Attached: 1519754858364.jpg (936x1436, 331K)

>story comes first
Seriously nothing wrong with that. Doesn’t have to always be the case but there’s nothing wrong with that at all.
>descriptive vs dreams
Dreaming is kind of better, but I don’t think there the change in style of 2049 is a fault.
>derivative and familiar
No. Not enough to be a glaring problem and certainly nothing like most of the shit you see in theaters today.
>kitsch; often tawdry
Not at all. Posturing hard here.
>familiar imagery/boring
Sounds like the complaint of a retarded contrarian child while also being untrue. Anything that looked like the previous Blade Runner, and there were a few things of course, come as an homage.
>narrative dependent
Holy shit stop repeating yourself to make a longer list you retard, this shit doesn’t fly outside of high school and undergrad which is like high school 2.0
>safety/clarity/forced
Moreso than the original Blade Runner. I can understand that. Still nothing was done in an overtly bad way regarding these things in 2049.
>left/right brain
Both right brain
>REPETITIVE SHIT TO FILL SPACE MORON
>REPETIVE SHIT
>Looks like work
No. Not in the slightest.
>Done for money
Holy shit no dude holy fuck, you think the average person even gives a shit about something as commonly regarded as blade runner, wrong. Audiences are literally less receptive than ever to anything like this. The people who made 2049 wanted to.
>understood vs challenging and memorable
Both are very memorable, but yes the original Blade Runner is a little more challenging
>detail
Your whole fucking argument and even the inclusion of it is retarded
>technical argument
Fucking retarded. They really are hardly different here.

Attached: 1461516031426.jpg (493x741, 130K)

non asthetic taste confirmed

rob ager kino incoming

youtube.com/watch?v=PKwLFHivBSM

youtube.com/watch?v=jCN9Akc9zbc

youtube.com/watch?v=yYlgKBYfGCQ

Attached: no.jpg (102x124, 3K)

It's baffling to me that anyone follows such a literally tasteless Hollywood garbage manchild drone as Rob Ager is.

This video of his is the perfect example
youtube.com/watch?v=k03Dq_AlhvY&gl=DE
99% of the list is nothing but straight up Hollywood """entertainment""" garbage, absolutely beyond embarassing. Ready player one, disney cartoons, tarantino flicks, prometheus, worse than reddit 9gag tier taste

Attached: rob the manchild.jpg (400x400, 60K)

hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/rutger-hauer-blade-runner-2049-why-films-today-lack-balls-1085827

Attached: 1547125254803.png (500x420, 155K)

>"It's not a character-driven movie and there's no humor"
This reads like a Yea Forums brainlet post.
Rutger Hauer was a based actor, now sadly he became a yet another slightly demented old forgotten man with no firm grasp on reality.

Attached: rutger hauer_bss2017.jpg (985x763, 89K)

.........sure

Attached: 1548286212913.gif (200x200, 1.92M)

OLD GOOD
NEW BAD

I think K should've had a few album and movie posters on his walls!

because these guys had actual experience on stage, whereas today's stars are hired from models and shit

I'll give a genuine answer to this if anyone's interested

Confirmation bias, and the fact that most "bad acting" is really just bad writing.

Most movies are mediocre - that's what mediocre means. And as David Mamet said, good writing needs no help from the actor, bad writing can't be helped. There are plenty of movies from the past where the acting is sub-par (or the writing, or editing, & c.) Those movies typically aren't still talked about and watched and loved. Instead we remember the Godfathers and the Dog Day Afternoons and forget about the sub-par movies.

DISHONEST

the next wave of actors are going to be Instagram influencers (or otherwise social media personalities), you'll look back fondly to today by comparison

BASED JAMES WOODS BREAKIN' OFF SOME WISDOM

The first is way better my good dude. Just look at it.

reading comprehension

>more things in frame means it's better

Imagine being excited for this

I'm excited for capeshit and starshit dying, yes.

>literally no one answered him
kek, you're all a bunch of pseuds

user... you should probably do some research before you open your mouth and let stupid shit fly out.

How does that guy turn into David Bowie midway through his expression?

Anyone else wish movies were still made on film. I feel like digital gives more of a burden to the actors if that makes senses

Because ensembles used to actually *rehearse*, not just learn their lines then do the takes over and over and let the editor just Frankenstein shit together. That’s why it feels natural - the individual actors are actually interacting, reacting to what they’re hearing, and speaking over each other in an organic fashion, like a real dinner table conversation. This scene shot by some modern hack would have roughly seven thousand cuts, multiple, totally pointless close-ups as they brought actors back to punch in dialogue, etc.

These people actually cared about what they were making. The only scene in recent memory to rival the feel of this was that scene between Casey Affleck’ character and his estranged wife in “Manchester by the Sea.”