Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) — Page 3

You mean when a character offhandedly mentions they don't want to have sex in front of 800 people?

---

NOOOO! Please say it ain't so! We've been checking off seeing all the awards-prone movies these last 2 weeks (FOXCATCHER, IMITATION GAME, THEORY OF EVERYTHING, INTERSTELLAR, INTO THE WOODS) and we gotta say that in a sea of 6's and 7's, we thought BIRDMAN was a total 10! Far more satisfying than that shallow exercise that was catnip for critics called BOYHOOD. Oh well.

"You mean when a character offhandedly mentions they don't want to have sex in front of 800 people?"

Well, this isn't my issue with this film by any means, but yes, I think that is the reference.

Happily a few awards are now coming BIRDMAN's way.
Gotham Awards just gave it Best Picture and Best Actor to Michael Keaton.
National Board of Review awarded Best Actor to Michael Keaton, and Best Supporting Actor to Ed Norton. Not an avalanche, but heartwarming nonetheless.

The Theory Of Everything might give it a run for its money for Picture and Actor and Actress.

---

Updated On: 12/3/14 at 06:59 PM

Didn't enjoy a single thing about this movie.

---

Thought it was crap.

---

I enjoyed it. It wasn't the masterpiece some are claiming it to be, but I thought it was good. But that very last scene made me LOL. That was just plain stupid.

I loved it and it's my favorite of the Best Picture nominees I've seen thus far (still have yet to see Selma and American Sniper). In the first 30 minutes or so, I wasn't sure how I felt about it, but as it went on, the film kept pulling me in deeper and deeper. I loved the fact that I was (mostly) surprised from scene to scene. I even enjoyed the last scene. The only major misstep to me was that I pretty much knew what the climax of the film would be from early on. But what I didn't expect was how the events would eventually unfold from there. And unlike Boyhood, I wasn't bored out of my skull.

---

Its theme is revelatory: "It's hard to age in show business." The first 45 minutes have a dazzling quality, the technique is extraordinary. But as persuasive storytelling, on which some level it surely must function, it huffs and puffs so hard to keep its "specialness" vibe going until the end, and then it jumps the shark not once but twice. I didn't believe anything in it could happen, and by the time we meet the vicious dyspeptic critic for the Times, its satire is muddy at best. What's the edgy point? Art isn't easy? Theater is inherently self-congralulatory? And so are those who support it? Being 60 is hell? The St. James Theater should be easier to access? Consider how much the filmmakers want to send up pretentiousness, it's a pile-on of partsy-fartsy effects.

---

The bar he comes out after his encounter with a critic is the Rum House in the Hotel Edison.

Supposedly this & Boyhood are neck & neck. Now comes word American Sniper may pull an upset.

---

Still haven't seen it.

---

Self indulgent.That's what kept repeating in my brain. Amy Ryan and Merritt Weaver were the only 2 performance I liked. Only two who didn't leave teeth marks all over the scenery. ( to be fair- the script & direction made that inevitable)

Of course it will win. Actors LOVE to show how H A R D it is to be a working professional thespian. ( aww gimmee a break!) So they ( the largest voting block) will be sure to go for this.

Even Jackie Hoffman's tiny (vocal) cameo seemed OTT.
Meh.