rocknrolllover 9741
Oh shit all this crap again?
Thread
Posts in chronological order
rocknrolllover 9741
They los comdons
Queen fan
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
Aside from Coogan being funnier than SBC in the same way that Mount Everest is bigger than my left nut, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in this comparison.[/QUOTE]
Coogan, although not brilliant is a better serious actor, Coogan's alan partridge was very funny as was borat's Borat, but comedy is not subject it is actual real acting not just delivering lines for laughs , i am talking about being credible in fictional dramatic presentation.( coogan just played a porn baron in a movie, flamboynt and over the top, but just a porn baron a business man with showmanship and flair, but just that, a business man in a drama with a bit of a comical sense yet serious also.
Yet he was not playing as tall a order as Freddie Mercury, a serious musician with a unrivalled voice passion and showmanship , or a man with complicated personal relationships and a man loved by billions as is Freddie.
If Freddie did camp he did it with tremendous style and was not you common garden queen.
But my point is Cohen is not even as good as Steve Coogan at acting, and to be honest Coogan is pretty shit at it anyway. So that is reason enough for the comparison when you consider who Cohen is meant to be portraying.
Do you ever wonder why directors are not fighting to direct the movie? it is because they are scared of it.
in fact understanding how brilliant coogans alan partridge character was lets you see through borat
cohens borat was equally brliiantly observed and well done
but as with coogan , even though his alan partridge was so well observed and well written a character it does not mean they are brliiant at acting in straight roles, even roles where the character is humorous.
They are both different things , straight movie lead roles that require some realism and depth are not just funny characters like partridge or Borat, who are made up characters and can afford and benefit from being over the top and ridiculous. But then people make the mistake of thinking Freddie unequalled stage persona can be just summed up with the word camp or over the top , and that equates to direction on how to act like him ,when it was so much more
than that, and as a private man he was human and so had a broad range of emotions and attitudes he was not a caricature like Borat or partridge in other words, and so , for anyone to adequately take on playing him in his life story , requires someone who can seriously seriously act ,and i mean act their shoes off.
Otherwise it will be a travesty and disgrace to the mans memory.
That man who played Freddie in the everett thing was just doing a camp caricature and the same for the actor who played Everett himself the whole angle they approached acting that thing was caricature, and was not real.
that kind of camparry haminness , a poor relation of the carry on style , IS CERTAINLY NOT ! the way to tell Freddie's life story, it would be an utter insult!
Yes when Freddie did camp, if you want to call it camp, he did it french style!
he was not your common garden queen!
and is not to be trashed by such trashy haminness.
Freddie was a very exotic creature very rare and exuded so much charisma and style, he could have been French!
lol
i am not joking, Freddie was not english , he was exciting for Goodness sake!
the english are helplessly unexciting
they cant avoid being so
Freddie was not English he was exhilarating, pumping with raw sex and Power Power Power!!!!
a machine of unrivalled energy!!
yet privately tasteful and refined
And no ! stop before you think.
Borat doing his half English half french accent will not even whiff of it!! why are such dullards involved in this movie they have no idea at all!!!
Their insight is about as dull as Cohen's deadened dullard blurry fish eyed zombie delivery style.
pass me the lightening bolts, this monster is dead on the slab. And pay them no mind, they deserve such mockery for proposing such a colossus of one!
Just Who is the filmmaker, anyway?
I suggest you take a cold bath in the dark if you prefer floating with dead such dead fish as this motley crew, WAKE UP!! FOR GOODNESS SAKE
IT IS FREDDIE MERCURY THE GREAT!
Not some cheap tv comedian!
And not you common garden queen.
My God rescue me from this disaster!!!
Aside from Coogan being funnier than SBC in the same way that Mount Everest is bigger than my left nut, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in this comparison.[/QUOTE]
Coogan, although not brilliant is a better serious actor, Coogan's alan partridge was very funny as was borat's Borat, but comedy is not subject it is actual real acting not just delivering lines for laughs , i am talking about being credible in fictional dramatic presentation.( coogan just played a porn baron in a movie, flamboynt and over the top, but just a porn baron a business man with showmanship and flair, but just that, a business man in a drama with a bit of a comical sense yet serious also.
Yet he was not playing as tall a order as Freddie Mercury, a serious musician with a unrivalled voice passion and showmanship , or a man with complicated personal relationships and a man loved by billions as is Freddie.
If Freddie did camp he did it with tremendous style and was not you common garden queen.
But my point is Cohen is not even as good as Steve Coogan at acting, and to be honest Coogan is pretty shit at it anyway. So that is reason enough for the comparison when you consider who Cohen is meant to be portraying.
Do you ever wonder why directors are not fighting to direct the movie? it is because they are scared of it.
in fact understanding how brilliant coogans alan partridge character was lets you see through borat
cohens borat was equally brliiantly observed and well done
but as with coogan , even though his alan partridge was so well observed and well written a character it does not mean they are brliiant at acting in straight roles, even roles where the character is humorous.
They are both different things , straight movie lead roles that require some realism and depth are not just funny characters like partridge or Borat, who are made up characters and can afford and benefit from being over the top and ridiculous. But then people make the mistake of thinking Freddie unequalled stage persona can be just summed up with the word camp or over the top , and that equates to direction on how to act like him ,when it was so much more
than that, and as a private man he was human and so had a broad range of emotions and attitudes he was not a caricature like Borat or partridge in other words, and so , for anyone to adequately take on playing him in his life story , requires someone who can seriously seriously act ,and i mean act their shoes off.
Otherwise it will be a travesty and disgrace to the mans memory.
That man who played Freddie in the everett thing was just doing a camp caricature and the same for the actor who played Everett himself the whole angle they approached acting that thing was caricature, and was not real.
that kind of camparry haminness , a poor relation of the carry on style , IS CERTAINLY NOT ! the way to tell Freddie's life story, it would be an utter insult!
Yes when Freddie did camp, if you want to call it camp, he did it french style!
he was not your common garden queen!
and is not to be trashed by such trashy haminness.
Freddie was a very exotic creature very rare and exuded so much charisma and style, he could have been French!
lol
i am not joking, Freddie was not english , he was exciting for Goodness sake!
the english are helplessly unexciting
they cant avoid being so
Freddie was not English he was exhilarating, pumping with raw sex and Power Power Power!!!!
a machine of unrivalled energy!!
yet privately tasteful and refined
And no ! stop before you think.
Borat doing his half English half french accent will not even whiff of it!! why are such dullards involved in this movie they have no idea at all!!!
Their insight is about as dull as Cohen's deadened dullard blurry fish eyed zombie delivery style.
pass me the lightening bolts, this monster is dead on the slab. And pay them no mind, they deserve such mockery for proposing such a colossus of one!
Just Who is the filmmaker, anyway?
I suggest you take a cold bath in the dark if you prefer floating with dead such dead fish as this motley crew, WAKE UP!! FOR GOODNESS SAKE
IT IS FREDDIE MERCURY THE GREAT!
Not some cheap tv comedian!
And not you common garden queen.
My God rescue me from this disaster!!!
Queen4ever13
Sacha Baron Cohen is a joke, can anyone really take him seriously? If he manages to pull it off he may be seen differently. I can understand people feeling he is making a mockery but Freddie himself said "when I'm dead, who cares."
Queen fan
[QUOTE] [b]Queen4ever13 wrote:[/b]
Sacha Baron Cohen is a joke, can anyone really take him seriously? If he manages to pull it off he may be seen differently. I can understand people feeling he is making a mockery but Freddie himself said "when I'm dead, who cares."[/QUOTE]
Me.
Sacha Baron Cohen is a joke, can anyone really take him seriously? If he manages to pull it off he may be seen differently. I can understand people feeling he is making a mockery but Freddie himself said "when I'm dead, who cares."[/QUOTE]
Me.
Queen4ever13
"I won't be a rock star. I will be a legend." - Freddie Mercury
Queen4ever13
Freddie definitely had gigantic confidence and real intuitive insite, to take them all the way to the top and still be where they're at since his passing. That's star quality, brilliance! Think they should have been more selective in who they could have cast.
Queen4ever13
Just not Steve Coogan, he looks more like Prince Charles!
Queen fan
[QUOTE] [b]Queen4ever13 wrote:[/b]
Just not Steve Coogan, he looks more like Prince Charles![/QUOTE]
Just to be clear as their seems to be some people who do not read the posts ;
this THREAD IN NO WAY IS PROPOSING STEVE COOGAN SHOULD PLAY THE ROLE OF FREDDIE MERCURY IN THE BIOPIC
IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER WAS THE THAT THE PURPOSE OF ME POSTING THIS
I posted it to highlight the utter inadequacies of Sacha Baron Cohen AS AN SERIOUS ACTOR
by comparing him with Steve Coogan, who although is not a great actor himself, has far more craft and understanding of semi serious dramatic acting than Sacha does.
It should be noted that you can tell a comedian's potential for straight acting THROUGH THEIR COMEDY dramas, it is all there to see
It is notable that Sacha , even through the few roles he has played , has no talent for any kind of REALISM in an acting scenario, and indeed his comedy talent lies solely in the realm of true to life scenarios with NON ACTORS.
( his acting abilities kick in when he is conscious that he is about to approach a successful trickery of real people, that is how his fantasy mind mode or actors head works, and .that is where his " actors" head is coming from , and it is where his creative abilities at character portrayal flow fluently.)
The real world of actors is the ability to believe in a fictional realm and create it's components by being part of it, by totally using all their inner selves to be part of and enhance its reality, and also to bring it out amongst their fellow actors for the purpose of our immersion into the fictional story that is fictional totally but needs these people with these specific talents and abilities to make it work.
This IS what makes good fictional tv and movies believable , and so enjoyable to us.
Sacha does not believe in this fictional realm outside himself, he has to work best in a real environment for any of his fantasy to be brought forth, hence his characters are brought forth to a degree of success only in a real environment, tricking real people who are not in a fictional realm, but are in a everyday world and not a scripted one as such.
He in fact is not at home at all when part of a team of people who are creating a dramatic fictional environment conducive and essential to presenting a plausible dramatic fiction , which can tell a story in the unique way used in cinema and tv story telling.
These points are the reason i correctly state Sacha Cannot act, because he truly can't act in the accepted definition of a true actor , or does not have that capacity to an extent that is required for a reasonable standard of acting.
Of course any body could try to act, but the act of attempting to act to a degree of successful outcome, requires an ability to believe in a fictional world rather than believe in your own ability to trick the real one. There is a difference.
The Freddie Mercury Biopic WILL BE acted out by people who are able to believe THEY ARE REAL CHARACTERS IN A FICTIONAL REALITY
If they choose real actors that is. And so if they do choose real actors, those actors will be able to bring that fictional world to a level of reality that is believable , and so does its job and is enjoyable to an audiences imagination.
Just not Steve Coogan, he looks more like Prince Charles![/QUOTE]
Just to be clear as their seems to be some people who do not read the posts ;
this THREAD IN NO WAY IS PROPOSING STEVE COOGAN SHOULD PLAY THE ROLE OF FREDDIE MERCURY IN THE BIOPIC
IN NO WAY WHATSOEVER WAS THE THAT THE PURPOSE OF ME POSTING THIS
I posted it to highlight the utter inadequacies of Sacha Baron Cohen AS AN SERIOUS ACTOR
by comparing him with Steve Coogan, who although is not a great actor himself, has far more craft and understanding of semi serious dramatic acting than Sacha does.
It should be noted that you can tell a comedian's potential for straight acting THROUGH THEIR COMEDY dramas, it is all there to see
It is notable that Sacha , even through the few roles he has played , has no talent for any kind of REALISM in an acting scenario, and indeed his comedy talent lies solely in the realm of true to life scenarios with NON ACTORS.
( his acting abilities kick in when he is conscious that he is about to approach a successful trickery of real people, that is how his fantasy mind mode or actors head works, and .that is where his " actors" head is coming from , and it is where his creative abilities at character portrayal flow fluently.)
The real world of actors is the ability to believe in a fictional realm and create it's components by being part of it, by totally using all their inner selves to be part of and enhance its reality, and also to bring it out amongst their fellow actors for the purpose of our immersion into the fictional story that is fictional totally but needs these people with these specific talents and abilities to make it work.
This IS what makes good fictional tv and movies believable , and so enjoyable to us.
Sacha does not believe in this fictional realm outside himself, he has to work best in a real environment for any of his fantasy to be brought forth, hence his characters are brought forth to a degree of success only in a real environment, tricking real people who are not in a fictional realm, but are in a everyday world and not a scripted one as such.
He in fact is not at home at all when part of a team of people who are creating a dramatic fictional environment conducive and essential to presenting a plausible dramatic fiction , which can tell a story in the unique way used in cinema and tv story telling.
These points are the reason i correctly state Sacha Cannot act, because he truly can't act in the accepted definition of a true actor , or does not have that capacity to an extent that is required for a reasonable standard of acting.
Of course any body could try to act, but the act of attempting to act to a degree of successful outcome, requires an ability to believe in a fictional world rather than believe in your own ability to trick the real one. There is a difference.
The Freddie Mercury Biopic WILL BE acted out by people who are able to believe THEY ARE REAL CHARACTERS IN A FICTIONAL REALITY
If they choose real actors that is. And so if they do choose real actors, those actors will be able to bring that fictional world to a level of reality that is believable , and so does its job and is enjoyable to an audiences imagination.
Queen4ever13
I stand corrected.