Jade Bahr

Daily dose of party Leo 🐺

LOL Colin Farrell won probably the best award at the Razzies this year The least-coveted awards in Hollywood were announced this week as the Razzies came to town. There were some big winners at the Razzie awards but mostly all for the wrong reasons. The Annual Golden Raspberry Awards run alongside the Oscars each year to honour the very worst Hollywood has to offer. However, in a great turn of events, it looks like the Irish Hollywood takeover is enjoying even more success this year. The Banshees of Inisherin star and Best Actor nominee Colin Farrell probably came away with the best award you could win at the Razzies, the Redeemer Award. The Dub was given the prize for redeeming himself for his leading role in 2004's critically-panned Alexander, where he was nominated for Worst Actor, by becoming the 2022 Best Actor Oscar frontrunner. If you're going to win a Razzie, that's probably the best of the lot. Source

Season 4. Probably one of my favorite shows. This character is so fucked up. Love it LOL

The way he's sitting like he needed this amount of space between his legs for some reason 😄 Source

The Dunnes 💕

She really looks like she won in the lottery. Cute 😄 But meeting Leo in person is indeed something very special I can confirm from experience 🥰

I love everything about this show but especially the music and clothes 🤩

Clip of Leo in the last one: https://www.instagram.com/p/CpnM5a4MrZy/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Do you guys think Leo dyes his hair?

Never saw this movie before. Gosh it was BEAUTIFUL 😍

HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA - MARCH 09: (L to R) Leonardo DiCaprio, Sonia Guajajara, Minister of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil, and Gasparini Kaingang pose in the winners room at the Green Carpet Fashion Awards 2023 at NeueHouse Hollywood on March 9, 2023 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Dave Benett/Getty Images for Eco-Age) Movie news and Leos face all in one day. Must be easter already

PTA movie update. Gosh maybe we see Leo on a movie set this year afterall. LOL he's not not right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Bertram

So maybe Colin will win his oscar with the Batman spin off looking like this filling all the prosthetic boxes 😄 But I see it's a mini series so maybe the emmy for consolation ☺️ Still haven't seen "The Whale" but I like Brendan Fraser and his comeback momentum as I was blown away by Austins performance in ELVIS so may the better/more lucky guy win I'm just a sucker for hot irish men blinding my objectivity 😚💚

Billy Dunne 😊

One of my all time faves.

Uhm... what??????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is this a serious site? Exclusive: Leonardo DiCaprio Reteaming With Quentin Tarantino For Final Movie We've learned that Leonardo DiCaprio will appear in Quentin Tarantino's final feature film. We still don’t know what the director’s final film will be, but we know of one of the stars who will appear. Our trusted and proven sources have told us that Leonardo DiCaprio is set to appear in Quentin Tarantino’s final movie. Whether or not it will be the long-rumored Kill Bill 3 or something else has yet to be revealed. For some time now, Tarantino has vowed to end his feature directorial career with his tenth film, though last we heard the director hadn’t chosen anything, and everything from Kill Bill 3 to Star Trek 4 was in the running. The latter of those two has since been put to bed, and now that we’ve learned Leonardo DiCaprio will be in the feature, it would seem to suggest Kill Bill 3 isn’t Quentin Tarantino’s most likely choice. While DiCaprio’s romantic partners may be on the younger side, the actor will turn 49 years old this year and — unlike David Carradine when he appeared in the Kill Bill films — doesn’t have a lot of experience playing martial arts masters. That doesn’t completely discount the notion of Kill Bill 3. Tarantino’s films are known to be ensemble affairs and while Leonardo DiCaprio doesn’t tend to play second fiddle to other stars, for the Oscar-winning Quentin Tarantino, The Revenant star might make an exception. He could play a supporting character who doesn’t need to throw any fancy kicks like Michael Parks or Julie Dreyfus in the first film. Regardless of what part he plays in the film, Leonardo DiCaprio is fated to be given high praise in any mention of the career of Quentin Tarantino, particularly when it comes to the second half of the director’s time behind the camera. DiCaprio’s first time in a Tarantino feature was in the director’s seventh film, 2012’s Django Unchained. DiCaprio played hard against type as the film’s chief villain — the unapologetically sadistic and racist plantation owner Calvin Candie from whom Django (Jamie Foxx) and Dr. Schultz (Christoph Waltz) seek to liberate Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). Leonardo DiCaprio worked with Quentin Tarantino in the director’s latest feature, 2019’s Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. This time DiCaprio played the protagonist Rick Dalton, a 1950s TV star who finds his celebrity fading at the twilight of the 1960s. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood found both DiCaprio and Tarantino nominated for Oscars (Tarantino for 3), though sadly neither won in their various categories. We’d like to tell you we have an idea about when we’ll get to see Leonardo DiCaprio in Quentin Tarantino’s final film, but judging by the intervals between his previous movies, it’s impossible to even guess. This July will mark four years since the wide theatrical release of Tarantino’s ninth film, and a quick glance at IMDb tells us that the longest interval between his releases so far is six years (between 1997’s Jackie Brown and 2003’s Kill Bill: Vol. 1). As soon as we know more, we’ll make sure you do too. Source

The 20 Best Actors of All Time Coming up with a list that englobes the “best actors of all time” is no easy undertaking. It might be a highly subjective endeavour, in fact, seeing as everyone has their own tastes and requirements to be called the “best.” That said, there have been some great actors that shine just a little bit brighter than your everyday Hollywood celebrity, and that’s a fact. Knowing full well that this list is as subjective as they come, we’ve come up with a listing of the 20 actors who we believe are among the best artists to ever grace the silver screen. 2. Leonardo DiCaprio Starting in the movie business at a young age is rarely kind to child actors, but some of them, like Leonardo DiCaprio, end up reshaping the entire entertainment industry for the better. Not only is DiCaprio an incredible actor, but he’s also an immensely altruistic fellow, helping the environment and those in need with his philanthropic organizations. In 2015, thanks to The Revenant, Leonardo DiCaprio finally managed what some thought was impossible: he finally won the Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role, an accolade he had been pursuing for quite some time. full list

Great article. I think I actually agree with every single word (GO COLIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Also it mentioned Leo so it's not completely off topic LOL The Oscars vs. Regular Dudes It’s hard out here for a normal guy: Since 2010, only three Best Actor awards have gone to performances that weren’t either based on historical figures or defined by remarkable physical transformations Early on in The Banshees of Inisherin, Martin McDonagh’s Academy Award–nominated black comedy, Jonjo the pub owner attempts to comfort Colin Farrell’s character, Pádraic Súilleabháin, evaluating him as “one of life’s good guys.” Pádraic grimaces: “I used to think that’d be a nice thing to be. Now it sounds like the worst thing I ever heard.” If you’re in the hunt for an Academy Award for Best Actor, it might not be the worst thing, but portraying “one of life’s good guys”—just an ordinary dude not based on any historical figure or sporting any sort of showy, prosthetic-heavy accoutrements of transformation—certainly makes it tougher to bring home the gold, even if you’re Farrell in one of the most nominated films of the year. On paper, it would seem that Farrell, nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role, would be a lock for a win. He’s a beloved actor headlining a film boasting not only nine nominations, but also the rare feat of four acting nods. Just a few weeks ago, Banshees was even tipped as a potential spoiler for Best Picture come March 12. Alas, standing in his way are two of the exact types of performances that regularly beat out an “ordinary dude” performance at the Academy Awards. The first is the transformation, a recognizable actor caked in prosthetics and prone to histrionics, typically preceded by a “first look” image that generates the kind of “Oh wow, I don’t even recognize them” buzz that kick-starts an Oscar campaign. These are your Gary Oldmans in Darkest Hours, your Joaquin Phoenixes in Jokers. And this year, it’s The Whale’s Brendan Fraser, whose character, Charlie, doesn’t do much more than sit on a couch and get berated by visitors, but who’s under enough silicone rubber to crush a small dog. The second is the historical figure pick, also known as a famous person playing a famous person, with bonus points added if they’re a musical artist. This is Rami Malek in Bohemian Rhapsody, Eddie Redmayne in The Theory of Everything, and this year, Austin Butler in Elvis. While Butler is just a young buck, and while an anti-youth bias has hurt people like Timothée Chalamet or even Leonardo DiCaprio in the past, it may not matter here because people know what Elvis looked and sounded like, and Butler sure does look and sound like Elvis! The Academy has been seduced by these kinds of performances for a while. Since 2010, only three performances that don’t fall into these two camps have taken home the Oscar for Best Actor: Jean Dujardin in The Artist, Casey Affleck in Manchester by the Sea, and Anthony Hopkins in The Father. And in each of those years, there bizarrely wasn’t even a real competitive analogue to these types of bait-y turns: Dujardin’s chief competition was George Clooney in The Descendants, Affleck’s was Denzel Washington in Fences, and Hopkins’s was Chadwick Boseman in Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, all also “ordinary dudes.” When given the opportunity, the Academy will always choose a transformation or a real-life figure over the normal guy. And on March 12, it’s likely they’ll do it again. The question is: Why? Certainly, each win has its own context. Sure, in 2018, when Oldman beat Chalamet’s performance in Call Me by Your Name and Daniel Kaluuya’s in Get Out, it was for a makeup-heavy portrayal of a historical figure (a double whammy!). But it was also about seizing the opportunity to reward a veteran character actor, acknowledging that the young ones would have more days in the sun down the road. Indeed, three years later, Kaluuya got his win—for playing a real person. And in the case of Redmayne’s and Malek’s wins for playing Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything and Freddie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody, respectively, it was widely reported at the time that both of them were savvy campaigners, shaking hands and kissing babies all over town in the lead-up to their eventual victories. That still doesn’t make it less glaring that, in a year when Birdman won Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and Best Cinematography, the Academy still found a way to pass over Michael Keaton’s ordinary-dude lead performance for Redmayne’s transformation into Hawking in a far less beloved film. Or that Bradley Cooper, playing a fictional musician and doing all his own singing and playing, somehow lost to Malek, playing a real-life famous one in a performance that plays mostly like a mediocre “Lip Sync for Your Life” challenge on RuPaul’s Drag Race. These choices make more sense when you realize that the Academy is made up of various different branches (writers, directors, actors, craftspeople, etc.), each varying in age, gender, and racial demographics. Through that lens, it becomes a bit easier to understand how nonactors would see Bohemian Rhapsody and say, “Wow, I love Freddie Mercury, and Rami Malek looks just like him! This is acting!” It’s the same logic that would explain why the Academy overlooked any number of exceptional performances by Phoenix over the years only to finally reward him for the one in which he smears clown paint on his face, dances in a bathroom like Twyla Tharp, and sleeps in a fridge. But the biggest branch of the Academy, by quite a margin, is, in fact, that of the actors themselves. If they’re the ones with the biggest say in the eventual winners here, shouldn’t that be reflected in the choices? Should the winners not then demonstrate a more nuanced understanding of the craft of acting, how an empathetic depiction of normal human behavior can be just as effective as a big, flashy biopic performance, if not more so? Perhaps that’s giving actors too much credit. It’s possible they are drawn to these types of performances because they are so objectively the centerpieces of their films, the engines that drive them far more than their directors. It’s also possible that they’ve fallen prey to the cynical mimeographic tricks of a Bohemian Rhapsody or an Elvis, the ones that invite side-by-side comparisons of Malek’s performance and Mercury’s own at Live Aid, or Butler’s take on “If I Can Dream” against Presley’s 1968 comeback special. Such tricks turn the act of performance into a sort of unimaginative game of copy and paste, but they also slyly make the act of rewarding them seem more objective. The closer the comparison, the argument might go, the better the performance. Of course, it’s also possible that other actors simply like these performances the most. And that’s valid. After all, one can remain immune to the fat-suit dramatics and goofy sentimentality of Fraser’s performance in The Whale while at the same time understanding that he’s been justifiably working on a comeback narrative all season, portraying genuine gratitude for a second act after an unjust blackballing. One could also cop to finding Butler’s Elvis turn an impressive but unmoving bit of museum waxwork imitation while simultaneously feeling excited by the prospect of a new movie star on the rise. It’s not that it’s impossible to understand the reasoning and appeal behind either of these potential wins; it’s that it’s frustrating to see these types of performances once again overshadow an “ordinary dude” performance as skillful as Farrell’s in Banshees. Throw aside his innate understanding of the rhythms and cadences of McDonagh’s script, or even how he skillfully transitions from comedy to pathos with unmatched ease. It’s his portrayal of a good man, a benevolent, easygoing puppy dog who is slowly driven to hate and division, that forms the entire tragic crux of the film, an arc more compelling than the static soapiness and Wikipedia entry perfunctoriness of his competitors. And while there are no YouTube comparison videos of him and other real-life slightly dumb Irish guys who love their donkeys and are going through a sad time, the no-man’s-land after the end of a significant relationship is something with which surely anyone—even Academy voters—can empathize. Should said voters crave proof that Farrell can also wildly transform, they should look no further than 2022’s The Batman, in which his padded, prosthetic-caked, scene-stealing take on the Penguin plays as a sort of amalgamation of both Fraser’s performance and that of Butler’s costar Tom Hanks, and yet is somehow more engaging and entertaining than either. All that said, this is not a piece meant to argue for a Farrell win on March 12; it’s merely one that ponders how an organization meant to champion imagination makes such consistently unimaginative choices when it comes to rewarding actors. A look back at Academy history reveals this to be a fairly recent epidemic, at least in the Best Actor category. Compared to the post-2010s count of three performances not based on a historical figure or boasting any major physical transformation, there were four from 2000 to 2009, eight in the ’90s, six in the ’80s, and a whopping nine in the ’70s. That decade alone saw rewards for such legendary film figures as The French Connection’s “Popeye” Doyle, The Godfather’s Vito Corleone, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’s Randle McMurphy, and Network’s Howard Beale. That’s a far cry from the Madame Tussauds exhibit this category has become since the 2010s. There was a brief glimmer that the tide had turned on nomination morning, when Paul Mescal and Brian Tyree Henry surprised with nominations for understated ordinary-dude performances. It seemed the promise of a new generation drawn to making less bait-y but subtler, richer, and more rewarding work, as well as the possibility of an Academy ready to reward such choices. Perhaps this was a bellwether in favor of the ordinary dudes, and in turn in favor of Farrell, who was in one of the most beloved movies of the year and also seemed to be exactly the kind of actor’s actor the Academy couldn’t resist rewarding. Alas, the award gauntlet eventually left Farrell in the dust, along with his stack of critics’ wins and his Golden Globe Award for Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy. The race is now firmly between Butler (with his Globe and BAFTA) and Fraser (with Critics Choice and SAG awards). The cycle continues, and either the Whale or Elvis shall triumph. But to quote Elvis himself, if I can dream of a better land, I might dream of an award season when prosthetics are locked up, biopics are shut down, and ordinary dudes run amok. Imagine the rich, interesting slate of acting nominees we might have without Freddie Mercury, Stephen Hawking, Winston Churchill, and the Joker crashing the party. Perhaps, then, it might not seem so impossible for “one of life’s good guys” to take home the gold. Source

^

rolled up jeans it seems 😅

^I also wonder if Leo has some special playlist for this kind of event to get in the mood (alexa play hungry eyes) and if he picked all the clothes the girls are wearing by himself 😅