Cage was actually pretty good back in the day. Then I think he kinda fell apart with some of his later films like Ghost Rider, Knowing, The Wicker Man, Left Behind, etc.
Have you seen Cage in Raising Arizona, Red Rock West, Leaving Las Vegas, Bringing out the Dead, Adaptation, Lord of War, and Herzog's Bad Lieutenant? He makes many crap movies to pay for his debts, but he often teamed up with great directors in the past, and delivered good performances.
Cage is good in roles in which his weirdness is a strength rather than a weakness. He cannot control himself, so when he has to display the kind of inner tension that is common in (and crucial to) most dramas, he becomes a joke. But certain roles -- Raising Arizona, Leaving Las Vegas, Bad Lieutenant, Adaptation -- play to his nature, and then he's good. And another thing, the guy never mails it in. He treats every scene like it's life-and-death, which is definitely a huge part of the problem with him, but his terribleness is not for lack of effort.
Good observation, jmellor. I loved Cage in Raising Arizona. I think that's the only thing I've really loved him in. But he was pretty good in Adaptation and Matchstick Men, too.
Moonstruck is one of my favorites movies and I've seen it many times, but I'm still not sure whether I like Cage's performance or not. There's something really weird about him, yet something a little compelling too. At least he got Loretta away from his dull brother Johnny. (RIP Danny Aiello.)
I really hate Nicolas Cage. Not just the actor, and not even just the person, but the idea. Every time I see a picture of his face I want to destroy it and rage. Every time I think about him I think about how I vehemently hate him. I hate his awful monotone expression that makes him look like the worst person ever, which is what he is.
Most typically you go by the year of the movie, not by the year of the ceremony. Therefore, the Best Actor of 2014 is Eddie Redmayne. Adjust the years and I'll like the quiz.
This is not like googleplay or something. Do this or that and I ll give 5 stars. The quizmakers dont make money of the quizzes so you have nothing to bargain with.
not that i think the commentwriters on google play have the power they think they have. DO THIS OR THAT OR I WILL STOP PLAYING. You think they care? Sorry to rant haha, but some people truely think the rest of the world is there to cater to them, and actually believe others will do as they say (not as much about this comment anymore btw)
Biggest rob/snub ever is that Bruno Ganz wasn’t nominated for playing Adolf Hitler in 2004’s fantastic ‘Downfall.’ Hitler’s one of the most played and thankless roles ever: you’re as evil as Voldemort or Palpatine but more real and less fun. Ganz CRUSHED it, and while Jamie Foxx was excellent as Ray Charles in ‘Ray,’ there’s just no topping Ganz.
I’d put his performance among the 10 best in the history of cinema, and he wasn’t even nominated.
How did Orson Welles never win best actor for Citizen Kane? I used to think Matthew Maconaughey couldn't act until I saw him in True Detective. I'll have to see Dallas Buyers Club. Haven't seen it yet.
Same reason it didn't win Best Picture, or any of its nine nominations other than Best Writing: because William Randolph Hearst, upon whose life Kane was largely inspired, did his best to destroy the film in any way he could.
I realize I'm committing movie sacrilege here since it's supposed to be the greatest film ever made - and I am not trolling - but I did not like Citizen Kane. I had to force myself to watch the whole thing. Maybe someone can explain to me what I'm missing that made it so great. I guess I'm just a Casablanca kind of girl.
I think the reason Citizen Kane is held in such high regard is because it did a lot of things that were considered brand new for the time. There are things like low-angle shots, dissolves, non-linear storytelling, people talking over another, newsreel/documentary footage providing exposition, etc.
Of course, Welles wasn’t the first person to use these techniques but he used so many of them and used them effectively. You can tell a lot about what’s going on in just one shot. Also, not super important but a lot of the actors in the film, including Welles himself, were either brand new or had little experience with acting, and a lot of the performances are amazing.
Compare this movie to other films of the time, where they felt more like plays than cinema. Citizen Kane practically changed the way films would be made and was more groundbreaking than movies like Jurassic Park or The Matrix or Avatar.
Wow, you & me both, ander217!!! I forced myself to watch it too, because it was "Citizen Kane". Afterward, I couldn't figure out what I'd missed that made it so fantabulous. And I will never get tired of watching "Casablanca".
I echo Jack's sentiment. It has everything to do with what the film meant at the time, and little to do with how the film reads now. If you look on AFI's "Greatest Films" list, you'll also see Toy Story, which, although a great movie, is really just on the list because it was the first fully computer-animated movie. Obviously pretty much everything is computer-animated now, but that movie was mind-blowing when it came out. Casablanca and the Godfather are much better films to watch and enjoy.
It might be nice to show your highscore on a quiz while you are taking it. So you know if you are remembering any new ones that round around. For these long ones at least.
Same, but at the same time it kinda sucks that they passed over their last chance to award Boseman. But if I were voting for the award, I'd agree that Hopkins would have my vote. Strongest performance in the category in a long time.
It makes no sense why some Oscar quizzes were updated but only two weren't... 5/7 featured Oscar quizzes were updated but the actor categories weren't? That doesn't make any sense if we're being honest.
I agree with TheodoreE45. Why some Oscar updates and not others? Meanwhile, every time a football player gets a touchdown, we get 45 updated football quizzes (a real joy to do those over and over again btw). It's arbitrary to say that the Oscars are decreasing in cultural relevance. As long as they are still shown to a national (worldwide?) audience every year, and they make front page news after the ceremony, I'd say they're still pretty relevant...especially to film buffs. I actually look forward to these resets, as opposed to many others on this site.
Thank you! I didn't want to point out the sports quiz resets because I didn't want to seem spiteful but when it comes to Oscar's there's only 7 featured quizzes, and those update once per year. There's easily several dozen sports quizzes that get updated at least once a year. Also I would have to say that the Oscar's are more culturally relevant than something like college basketball, or top-scoring members of Manchester United.
Decreased ratings is not a sign of falling cultural relevance. People simply don't watch broadcast TV as much anymore and can get their entertainment news online. Sure, plenty of people don't care about the Oscars, but that isn't new.
Coincidentally, I decided to update my featured quizzes every other year around the same time Quizmaster made his decision on these quizzes. But mine have nearly 500 answers each and take a bit more time to update. Relevance or lack thereof has never really been a factor of mine.
I'll never understand the people on this site who brag about how ignorant they are on a subject. What pride is there to be had in not knowing something on a quiz site?
Once again, the years are wrong - they should be the year of the movie that won, not the year of the ceremony. Saying Cillian Murphy is the Best Actor of 2024, for instance, makes no sense.
---
This quiz was way more fun than the other oscar quizzes, but I don't know why...
not that i think the commentwriters on google play have the power they think they have. DO THIS OR THAT OR I WILL STOP PLAYING. You think they care? Sorry to rant haha, but some people truely think the rest of the world is there to cater to them, and actually believe others will do as they say (not as much about this comment anymore btw)
1953:
winner: WIlliam Holden for Stalag 17 -
should have been; Burt Lancaster for Here to eternity
1956;
winner: Brynner for KIng and I
should have been: Dean for the Gigant
1954:
winner: Harrisn for my fair lady
should have been: Sellers for dr Strangelove
1969:
winner; Wayne for True Grit
Should have been: HOffman for midnight cowboy
1992:
winner; Pacino for scent of a woman
should have been: Downey jr for CHaplin
2013:
winner: McConaughey for Dallas buyers club
shoud have been: Bale for American Hustle
Biggest rob ever. NO nom+win for Robins in Shawshank
I was going to go over the rest, but mostly you are just wrong on each of them.
I’d put his performance among the 10 best in the history of cinema, and he wasn’t even nominated.
Of course, Welles wasn’t the first person to use these techniques but he used so many of them and used them effectively. You can tell a lot about what’s going on in just one shot. Also, not super important but a lot of the actors in the film, including Welles himself, were either brand new or had little experience with acting, and a lot of the performances are amazing.
Compare this movie to other films of the time, where they felt more like plays than cinema. Citizen Kane practically changed the way films would be made and was more groundbreaking than movies like Jurassic Park or The Matrix or Avatar.
Honestly though I'm kind of surprised they didn't give it to him. I think nearly everyone expected him to win.