Am I the only one who feels this way?

[God Control 2,181]

I felt like this is a good new take on the movie. I mean this is the fourth remake of it so it’s good that that changed focus to something else, instead of being the same story except for the time period and the type of problems they face.

[codymonster 8,595]

He is an actor, and probably when creating his vision for the movie, he probably put a lot of thought into what he would get to do as an actor. So no, I don’t think for the awards necessarily, but he did probably put a lot of time and effort into making sure his character was a good role to play.

[2School4Cool 6,445]

First of all, I respect your opinion. Personally, I do disagree though. I feel that in order to properly tell a story of a young artist flourishing, there needs to be major focus on the older musician who is fading simultaneously. Ally is just as much of a lead role and Jack is. Sure Ally supported Jackson’s role but I feel like Jackson supported Ally’s role just as much. Without his platform, Ally would not be able to become the star since Jackson’s character is the one who’s already an established musician. He’s the one who takes her under his wing, she’s essentially stepping into his world. It would feel weird if we didn’t spend time getting to know all of the ins and outs of Jackson’s character. And I definitely don’t think Bradley made this movie to be the lead role and win an Oscar. I could be wrong, so don’t quote me on this, but weren’t there rumors that someone else was originally slated to play Jackson? And like Gaga said, regardless of what awards the movie did or didn’t win, the important thing is that this passion project of theirs impacted people, and it definitely impacted a lot of people.

[Glamourpuss 29,062]

He is a recovering alcoholic in real life and I think he just wanted to use his own experiences to really get into the role. The impression I always got from Gaga and Bradley throughout the whole A Star is Born era is that they were 100% committed to their roles and put everything they had into that movie.

I also think the movie focusing so much on Bradley helped to bring depth to the storyline. When he dies it makes it that much more of a gut punch than if he'd had barely any screen time and it helps the last song have the impact that it does. 

To sum it up, no I don't think he did it for the Oscar but I think he would have liked to have won one. 

[2HB 536]

24 minutes ago, Regina George said:

Sorry but that's exactly my point..  I literally am here explaining that the whole movie is not about Ally being a star but about Jackson who actually takes away the spotlight with his problems.. And that's false.. I like the movie and the story line which IMO is not about a star being born.. 

While the movie is titled A Star Is Born, I do think the destructiveness of alcoholism and codependent relationships has been a persistent theme in all 4 iterations. The movie is always about how the two protagonists affect each other. And that’s exactly what makes the title interesting because of what’s unsaid: while a star is born, another is doomed to fade. It’s triumph and tragedy at the same time.

I agree with u that the new version is more invested in its male protagonist than the previous ones, but I actually think it’s a major improvement to better explore the theme of destruction that persisted throughout all 4 movies. The new version added some backstories to Jack to better explore his humanity. As a result, he is far more sympathetic than his predecessors, and his struggle became more palpable and tragic: no matter how hard he tried, he would still be consumed by his demons, which is why I think the new version is the most emotionally impactful one.

[REALITY 76,579]

55 minutes ago, Regina George said:

I'm not saying it in a bad or SJW way at all.. If I did I'd mention the fact that Ally is literally the only woman we see in that movie BUT I'm not going there. I'm just thinking that Ally in the movie served as a way to show Jackson and his problems. I never felt like we got to see Ally enjoying her fame or just being Ally.. Jackson was ALWAYS there to take away the spotlight and it's pretty prominent if you take a good look at the movie. Watched it the other night and I really felt like that's the case. 

I see what you mean. 

But again, I think that's because the story now centers around Jackson, and to be completely honest, I'm fine with that. Yes, Ally does, in some ways, seem like she's just there to emphasize Jackson's problems, but I think that's an interesting way of turning the story on its head. Would it have been great for Gaga to have a more "proactive" role in the story? Sure, I suppose. But for the sake of what the story needed, I think she role was fine. 

[REALITY 76,579]

1 hour ago, SabadoDeGloria said:

I didn't say she was supporting, but could have been campaigned as supporting. It happens. And it wasn't because she had less to do, it was because her role and character were secondary to his and a plot device to further his journey in many ways. Her role is more a gray area. Just because there is a man and a woman in a movie doesn't mean they're both lead characters. In Little Women, is Timothee Chalamet a lead actor or supporting as he is the primary male character despite being secondary in many ways? It's all relative and can be twisted in terms of awards campaigning...Viola Davis campaigned lead for The Help but many people felt she could have campaigned supporting by arguing Emma Stone was the actual lead. Again, just Oscar politics, etc. 

Little Women is different though. There are many more characters in that story and the lines are more blurred with what is a "lead" role and what's a "supporting" role. With ASIB, there are no blurred lines. Gaga is literally the only prominent female actress in that movie. If there were other female actresses that had significant enough roles to rival Gaga, then that'd be a more steady argument to make.

I see what you mean, but Gaga is the lead actress in the movie, and her campaigning for the lead actress category was the correct thing to do. And as you said, she is in a grey area. So why make her go for supporting when you could argue just as well—if not, better—that she belongs in the lead role?

Leading actors and actresses don't necessarily need to have the story focused on them. They just need to be present enough and significant enough to earn the title of being the "lead actress." The only instance where it's difficult to discern that is when you have equally important and influential characters in the story (i.e. The Favourite). Scarlett Johansson was nominated for lead actress for Marriage Story, but in a lot of ways, you could argue that the story was about Adam Driver's character.

[spicedchy 184]

43 minutes ago, Regina George said:

Oh I don't think his movie diminished Ally's importance AT ALL.. I think she was really important to the movie but not as a focus of the movie but as a way to show Jackson's struggles if that makes any sense? 

Agreed that importance =/= focus. 

I guess my difference in opinion is that that bringing Jack’s issues to forefront on this level was a fine approach to remake without absolving it of it’s title/source content. I was going to add that: I feel as though it’s still as much Ally’s story were more or less seeing the implications of her trajectory, but mostly because I believe this point of this iteration was her perseverance at the end of the day. Would also maybe even argue that it was about the character overcoming Jackson’s struggles as it was about his character succumbing to them. But idk, maybe if Ally’s characterization wasn’t as nuanced, it’d make a difference? I just don’t see her as primarily a plot device. 

And, yeah, absolutely if you took the percentages of their roles line for line, he’d come out with the higher ratio, but I think Bradley played to their strengths, and allowed her moments outshine much of what else was happening narratively.

Definitely a worthwhile discussion. 

 

[Archduchess 2]

1 hour ago, Regina George said:

Am I the only one who feels this way?

no

[ProfessionalClown 10,647]

Definitely not at all. It was a passion project for him and didnt care much about the awards, but i understand why he was ma he didnt get directing.

The story was about the failing musician who's coping with alcoholism, medication abuse, and other issues. It focused on that because that was the main plot of the emssage of the movie. It shows the deterioration of a relationship when those substances can affect everything in your life and make you lose what you once had.

I saw this review on YouTube thata actually made me cry. A couple were talking about how they went through a very very similar situation and she talked about how she saw herself a lot in Ally in just wanting to make things work with someone who couldn't help themselves. Her husband was very emotional as well as he had overcome than, unlike Jackson, and they were saying how it could've easily ended like the movie did. 

Not to be rude but kinda saying he did it just to get an award is very disrespectful to someone who fought for Gaga to be in the role when everyone else said it was a mistake casting her in the role which earned her two Grammy's, an Oscar, BAFTA, and other awards. 

[zino 173]

1 hour ago, Regina George said:

I'm not saying it in a bad or SJW way at all.. If I did I'd mention the fact that Ally is literally the only woman we see in that movie BUT I'm not going there. I'm just thinking that Ally in the movie served as a way to show Jackson and his problems. I never felt like we got to see Ally enjoying her fame or just being Ally.. Jackson was ALWAYS there to take away the spotlight and it's pretty prominent if you take a good look at the movie. Watched it the other night and I really felt like that's the case. 

exactly, Ally basically didn't exist without Jackson, without talking about him, staying with him

while Jackson has SEVERAL huge scenes without even mentioning her existence, like the scene with his friend, the scene with the old man on the rehab, the scenes with his brother.

actually this was pointed in many reviews of the movie.

https://www.salon.com/2018/10/08/a-star-is-born-fails-to-thrive-bradley-coopers-vanity-project-is-more-corny-than-compelling/

http://berkeleybeacon.com/a-star-is-born-bradley-coopers-vanity-project/

https://screencrush.com/a-star-is-born-remake-problems/

[zino 173]

47 minutes ago, JRCF29 said:

Regardless, GP associates the movie with Gaga

yes, also she won majority of the awards, even won more acting awards than him lol

[2School4Cool 6,445]

15 minutes ago, ProfessionalClown said:

Definitely not at all. It was a passion project for him and didnt care much about the awards, but i understand why he was ma he didnt get directing.

The story was about the failing musician who's coping with alcoholism, medication abuse, and other issues. It focused on that because that was the main plot of the emssage of the movie. It shows the deterioration of a relationship when those substances can affect everything in your life and make you lose what you once had.

I saw this review on YouTube thata actually made me cry. A couple were talking about how they went through a very very similar situation and she talked about how she saw herself a lot in Ally in just wanting to make things work with someone who couldn't help themselves. Her husband was very emotional as well as he had overcome than, unlike Jackson, and they were saying how it could've easily ended like the movie did. 

Not to be rude but kinda saying he did it just to get an award is very disrespectful to someone who fought for Gaga to be in the role when everyone else said it was a mistake casting her in the role which earned her two Grammy's, an Oscar, BAFTA, and other awards. 

I believe I saw the same review! It was so beautiful. This movie impacted so many people in so many different ways.

[djBuffoon 12,120]

1 hour ago, Mill said:

No I don’t think this at all. I disagree sorry 

This. Perhaps Bradley had a bit more screen-time, but it's about both of their journeys. One character's arc wouldn't be possible without the other.

I also think, for what it's worth, that Cooper's performance was the best in his category at the Oscars.

[steven 5,957]

Omg, I’m ashamed to say it but I still haven’t watched the movie yet