Daniel Day-Lewis, best actor of ever, retires

>Daniel Day-Lewis, best actor of ever, retires

Good evening, sweet prince.

Was this scene predicting 2017? What did he mean by this?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Thread
letterboxd.com/people/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

He "retires" everytime he doesn't have a good project to work on. He'll get bored with cobbling.

>he retires
He is filming his next Paul Thomas Anderon movie about the fashion scene.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Thread

i guess this movie is done filming then

he ''retires'' everytime a role is done

Already finished filming months ago.

DDL is one of the most massively overrated actors of all-time and copied his craft from far superior artists, such as Marlon Brando. And is only liked by people that haven't seen very many films.

Prove me wrong

He is like Miyazaki
he retires but then he comes back because he gets bored

I can't you're right

His only good role is My Left Foot

He is the best actor simply because if you watch There Will Be Blood and then you watch any of his ither movies you can never tell it was actually him.

he transforms like no ither actor
he becomes the character 100%

he becomes the character in a way that no matter how much you know him you will not recognize him


he is the best actor ever lived on earth

t. favorite film is fight club

WEW

>he becomes the character in a way that no matter how much you know him you will not recognize him
You mean Gary Oldman?

I hated There Will Be Blood

h
>He is the best actor ever lived on earth

I agree with almost everything you wrote

>one of the most massively overrated actors of all-time

He's like, mildly overrated, in that people seem to think he's some kind of god. But he's an excellent actor nonetheless, among the best either of us could name. You don't win three Oscars for nothing.

Why? I loved it.

I'd tell you to go back to the IMDB forums, but since that's gone, I'll just tell you to go kill yourself

>copied his craft from far superior artists, such as Marlon Brando

woah, you mean, like ... acting???

have a (You) dumbass

Do you have an actual argument? nope didn't think so

Why would I argue with someone who I think should quite literally and unironically commit suicide?

Because you know you're wrong and have no argument ;)

>95% male

Why am I not surprised?

I wonder how many females post here

I don't get it.

Nice false flag "I'm a pleb" post

I agree actually

That's because he picks absurdly over-the-top roles, exclusively.

If you don't mind me saying something slightly wanky: It's a horror movie about the death of a man's soul. Like Citizen Kane, if Kane's last words had been "I'm glad I threw that stupid fucking sled out".

We start with Plainview as this hardscrabble hustler. The opening scene establishes his grit and determination; the scenes that follow establish his morally questionable nature. So the film invites us to anticipate his redemption arc. And, just as we'd expect, he encounters a puppy in the form of HW and an antagonist in Eli. We expect his redemption arc will follow one of the established forms: His conflict with Eli will threaten his relationship with HW and, for the love of his adopted son, he'll forsake the huge crusade. Or, he'll struggle with Eli and it will only be when Eli threatens HW that he will finally summon the will to overcome him. Or etc.

But instead, he submits himself before Eli, for the sake of money. And while he harbours resentment, he doesn't get to resolve that conflict - it just sort of fizzles. And once HW wants to leave, instead of being proud that his son is striking out on his own - and following in his footsteps at that - all he sees is another antagonist. So, when Eli returns, abased, crawling, we see his last shot at what we're used to being shown in the cinema as redemption: He'll help Eli. He'll bury the hatchet and, one con artist to another, he'll forge a genuine human connection. Butnaaah, instead he vents all the petty rage he's clearly been harbouring all these years; petty, useless rage over a conflict that basically ended with both parties winning years ago. And then he beats him to death with a bowling ball. And after that, after he's pissed away every chance the narrative has given him to show some semblance of humanity... he's finished.

I'm leaving out a very important part (his fake brother) because life's too short. If you didn't like it, well, you didn't like it, I suppose, but there's my two cents.

good.him and that movie sucked.

You're fucking retarded mate. Piss of to reddit.

This is actually true.
My dad think DDL has only been in one movie, but he has seen Lincoln, That retarded movie and Gangs of New York

hi reedit

How did he change his voice in There Will be Blood?

fuck off reddit

Gimme more delicious mad, I'm still hungry.

There are rumors that Daniel day Lewis rejected every movie by Terrence Malick because Malick does not respect the art of acting.

You don't belong here.

No one will ever be able to surpass this man.

h

>my real life is so deeply unsatisfactory that i invest deeply in illusory online communities

Don't try to make me feel sorry for you, it'll never work.

What is a good actor?

Left is a good actor,
Right is Leonardo DiCaprio in a costume.

h

Daniel Day lewis is such a great actor that once you perform with him side by side, your career is over.
Because people then realize how bad your acting is once compared to DDL.

To be fair Leo has improved since that role

Lincoln was boring af desu. Not even DDL's performance could save that film.

That's make-up, not acting.

sucks that we never got to see him in film with Joaquin Phoenix

Daniel Day Lewis is the best actor because once the shooting starts,
people forget Daniel Day Lewis was cast in the movie.

Paul Dano did not know the actor playing Daniel in There Will Be Blood was Daniel day Lewis until he saw his name in the credits.

Poor James Franco. He was a complete fuccboi the entire time.

Daniel Day Lewis is such a great actor that every actor that was in a movie with him automatically improved because of Daniel's acting aura.

>Paul Dano did not know the actor playing Daniel in There Will Be Blood was Daniel day Lewis until he saw his name in the credits.

that's just a classic Paul Dano move

I don't get it, what does Daniel Day Lewis have to do with There Will Be Blood?

>once you perform with him side by side, your career is over.

Yeeeah, like Tommy Lee Jones, and DiCaprio, and Pete Postlethwaite. Their careers really took a nosedive after acting beside Day-Lewis.

He's alright but has he ever played a midget?

I usually don't agree with anybody on this shithole but this is basically my opinion too.

kys reddit

this

Daniel Day Lewis lives only for the acting. He is truly the greatest actor in the world.

All the other actors first think a out the money, look at all these good actors selling themselves to capeshit for the cash.

It shows that he only acts in movies for the sake of acting, which nobody else in hollywood does and that is truly respectable.

Jango was literally the only movie where he wasn't leo and it took him saying the word nigger a lot to get there.

The Aviator
What's Eating Gilbert Grape

I'm not saying Leo is super tallented but he did act in these two films as well.

>Daniel Gay Lewis

wait he was the guy from There Will Be Blood?!

>method acting 101
>greatest actor ever

Pleb baby leave

>I know nothing about the art of performance and think all acting is the same

Why do I even come to this board?

heh *pssht* these kids are so dumb... i'm not gonna elaborate, offer any kind of thoughts, or impart any knowledge of my own or anything though.. heh these simple plebeians just aren't worth it. anyway i'm off to letterboxd where the intellectuals hang out. see ya kiddos.

>lb
>patrician

letterboxd.com/people/

Yeah this site is really umm, patrician. Sure.

But in all honestly all DDL does is basic tatics that they'll teach you in any introductory method acting course.

There isn't anything all that special about his style or approach, and while he does pull off some solid performances, many of them lack much subtlety or complexity.

He isn't bad, but he is nowhere near what people like make him out to be.

>But in all honestly all DDL does is basic tatics that they'll teach you in any introductory method acting course.
>There isn't anything all that special about his style or approach, and while he does pull off some solid performances, many of them lack much subtlety or complexity.

So why the three Oscars?

If Oscars equal quality than Crash (2004) is one of thw greatest films of all time.

I hope that was b8.

No, that was one year. I can buy a film or an actor or a screenplay or whatever getting an undeserved Oscar one year. Two is a stretch. Three needs you to give me more than bare assertions before I start caring what you think.

It's like this: the critical consensus, both among professional acting critics and those who vote on awards, is that DDL is an exceptional actor. So why should I believe you?

You're using a logical fallacy. Arguing from authority. You're not providing any proof or logic for your points. You're just saying "WELL THESE GUYS SAID HE WAS GOOD SO HE MUST BE GOOD! WHAT ARE YOU SILLY? ARE YOU SAYING THEY'RE WRONG? THATS DUMB!"

He isn't doing anything special or magical.

His performances are often very blunt and the lack depth and subtlety of other fantastic performances. He's good but he's far from the best.

It's also a fallacy to claim an argument is incorrect because it features a fallacy.

Way to go, you played thineself.

Oh my god please let this be b8

Okay this is my last response on less you actually say something of value.

You're entire argument was a fallacy. You're argument was these people say he's good so he must be good.

You have offered nothing more than that.

I have offered reasons for why I think he is overrated.

All you have done is say that other people agree with you, while providing zero actual reasons for why you are right.

So tell me what makes DDL the greatest actor to ever live?

I'm not even the guy you were talking to. Just pointing out your illogics.

Well in that case, I hope you're happy with me for showing how your blindly asserted claim was completely incorrect and very embarrassing.

You're welcome.

He's '''retired''' like 3 times and if you weren't huge plebs you'd already know this

>You're using a logical fallacy. Arguing from authority.

No, that's only a fallacy where the authority is inappropriate, or where there is a significant degree of dissent among authorities. The authorities I'm referring to are appropriate; they are people who have succeeded in the competitive marketplace of assessing the abilities of actors. "97% of oncologists believe X is the best treatment for Y form of cancer" is not a fallacious argument.

So I have not, as you wrongly assert, claimed that you must be "DUMB" because you appear to disagree with the very clear consensus among avowed and acknowledged experts. Rather, I have asked you to explain how it can be that, though you are correct, the overwhelming majority of those professionally concerned with the matter are wrong. That is something you will need to account for, over and above presenting your own assessments.

I would advise you to drop this fallacy schtick btw, you may be OK at it by bush league standards but from what I've seen, I'll make you literally fucking cry if you keep trying that shit on me.

>There isn't anything all that special about his style or approach, and while he does pull off some solid performances, many of them lack much subtlety or complexity.
this is a shitty and meaningless critique. you said nothing of value here.

Leave method acting to me

>how to spot a retarded faggot 101

i don't get the hype with him, just a bunch of behind the scenes antics of his method acting crap. i liked him in there will be blood and gangs of new york but everything else i've watched him in was just meh