I kind of like films like 'Lady Bird'. Coming of age, teenage dramas where the characters have infinite charm and deal with things we all remember fondly (or not so) from our adolescence. A particularly fond one from recent memory was 'Edge of Seventeen'. I like them as films, but they have to be something truly superb to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. For me 'Lady Bird' was not quite that good.
I never read any other opinions or reviews of films before I review them myself, so as to make my review as purely mine as possible. I read in the trivia section though that this has been a nearly perfectly reviewed film. I'm going to be fascinated to read a number of those reviews. That's not to say I can't see someone giving this a good review - it's a perfectly good film after all - but for no one to have found fault in it is incredulous to me.
Saoirse Ronan has been nominated for Best Actress in a Lead Role. She was good without really blowing me away. She had charm and innocence and likability down, but she wasn't given a whole lot of emotion to work with in her character. It's hard to see her winning. Laurie Metcalf was also nominated for Best Supporting Actress and again there simply wasn't enough for her to work with to have any chance of winning the award. She did well with what she was given, but never blew me away by any means.
I would describe 'Lady Bird' as forgettable. A solid, well made, well acted film that I will likely never recall ever again. There is nothing there that will stick with me. When I think back on the great Best Picture nominees over the years (even the ones that didn't win, 'Amour' 'The Green Mile' etc.) they have moments that will stick in my memory until the day I die. 'Lady Bird' had nothing like that in any way, shape or form. Not a bad film, I had just hoped for more.
I never read any other opinions or reviews of films before I review them myself, so as to make my review as purely mine as possible. I read in the trivia section though that this has been a nearly perfectly reviewed film. I'm going to be fascinated to read a number of those reviews. That's not to say I can't see someone giving this a good review - it's a perfectly good film after all - but for no one to have found fault in it is incredulous to me.
Saoirse Ronan has been nominated for Best Actress in a Lead Role. She was good without really blowing me away. She had charm and innocence and likability down, but she wasn't given a whole lot of emotion to work with in her character. It's hard to see her winning. Laurie Metcalf was also nominated for Best Supporting Actress and again there simply wasn't enough for her to work with to have any chance of winning the award. She did well with what she was given, but never blew me away by any means.
I would describe 'Lady Bird' as forgettable. A solid, well made, well acted film that I will likely never recall ever again. There is nothing there that will stick with me. When I think back on the great Best Picture nominees over the years (even the ones that didn't win, 'Amour' 'The Green Mile' etc.) they have moments that will stick in my memory until the day I die. 'Lady Bird' had nothing like that in any way, shape or form. Not a bad film, I had just hoped for more.