Birdman...

Raymond Lin · 24 Jan 2017 at 22:02

I've seen this once before. I don't remember being won over by it or particularly memorable. May be I am missing something, is there an underlying message I've missed that escalated to a level that won Best Picture?

I might watch it again to pick up the things that I've missed.

If you think it's great, tell me what I should appreciate and looks out for.

slackrob · 25 Jan 2017 at 03:49

Can remember watching this when it first came out and from what I remember I enjoyed it. Keaton was quite engaging but as you say a reviewing may be order.

Richeh · 25 Jan 2017 at 04:24

I've only seen it the once but thought it was very good. It was a combination of great acting, directing, sharp script and a fairly unique story with the added fact of the whole film being one long continuous shot. Best film ever no but I think it had enough to warrant the best picture for that year especially as it's all subjective.

v0n · 25 Jan 2017 at 05:17

It's one of those "you'll never understand it unless you know internal struggles of an actor first hand" psychological Academic features turned into internal joke "cause the actor was Batman, Birdman, geddit, lol?" things.

From your perspective Raymond you should be in awe because the whole thing is shot by DOP from steadycam as a fake "single take" joined only at random moments when someone closes the door or walks through a dark passage backstage. Hmmmkay?

DrToffnar · 25 Jan 2017 at 09:45

Whilst it's true that the Academy may have favoured it due to there bias toward films about Broadway/Hollywood etc., you can't deny that it's about more then just some inside meta joke. It's far too easy to dismiss a movie like this as 'pretentious twaddle'.

It ceaselessly asks questions about the true nature of the 'artist' (in this case the actors) and tries to make sense of what exactly makes a great performance. At the same time, it makes a bold statement about what lengths an artist might have to go to in order to attain greatness or in this case, also REINVENT there image, but at what cost?

There's of course a lot of in jokeiness about Hollywood and the nature of modern cinema, but there is absolutely more there then people often give it credit for post hype.

joeyjojo · 25 Jan 2017 at 10:56

v0n said:
It's one of those "you'll never understand it unless you know internal struggles of an actor first hand" psychological Academic features turned into internal joke "cause the actor was Batman, Birdman, geddit, lol?" things.

Pretty much. Although this is a slightly flippant way of putting it. See DrToffnar's post above.

TriedandTested · 28 Jan 2017 at 18:27

Richeh said:
the whole film being one long continuous shot.

It was just made to look that way.