MovieChat Forums > Serena (2015) Discussion > are they trying to be the new Meg Ryan a...

are they trying to be the new Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks?

posted 11 years ago by rakusa
52 replies | jump to latest

I'm sure there's a newer/more often connected couple in Hollywood but that's the one that has come to my mind. I'm talking about the fact that Jennifer Lawrence and Bradly Cooper are now in at least three movies together. I have no interest in seeing a single one of those movies. I might have been more interested in one of them if they weren't both staring in them and probably not even then but the fact that they're not expanding their wings by acting with other people turns me of these movies.

[–] la di da 11 years ago

Not a big fan either. They're both ok.

However, if it's not broke, why fix it?

Their films make tons of money even if they are annoying and stick to your teeth like salt water taffy.

History is written by the victors.

[–] la di da 11 years ago

This thread is outrageously funny
Cooper better than hanks?!
Imagine cooper playing gump or an aids victim, omg and two hours of just cooper on an island like cast away?
Lawrence better than ryan?!
Imagine how irritating she would be playing sally or in city of angels?

People youre worship of lawrence and cooper is both amusing and sad.
There was an actual petition on here for her to be nominated for catch a fire. What?!

For the love of god, millenials, see more movies please!

History is written by the victors.

[–] Grizbat83 11 years ago

@ la di da: Don't lecture because your hatred for Lawrence clouds your objectivity. As was stated above Cooper's not Hanks but you should have stopped there.

You say "Imagine how irritating she would be playing sally or in City of Angels?" CoA is an embarrassment; a "Wings of Desire wannabe that Lawrence wouldn't have touched w/ a ten-foot pole.

Lawrence at 23 has already surpassed Ryan by any measurement you want to make. Please try Meg playing in Winter's Bone or Poker House if you want to see an actor out of her depth -- films made when Lawrence was a teenager.

No millenial here; in fact you're the one who needs to see more films; or at least learn to stop typing when your bias betrays ignorance.

[–] la di da 11 years ago

Oh please no one would be even thinking of lawrence if not for the success of the hunger games and cooper because of the hangover.

Let us not forget who is the legendary puppet master, harvey weinstein who is responsible for this obvious media machine.

Mr. Midas will make sure you stay blinded by subpar acting.

History is written by the victors.

[–] ssanders_colson2012 11 years ago

Oh yes, you're right. Jennifer didn't completely blow people away with her turn in Winter's Bone, for which she got an Oscar nomination. She didn't do very well in indie films such as The Poker House or Burning Plain. She didn't land a role in an already successful franchise like XMen before The Hunger Games. You should probably just stop talking.

[–] la di da 11 years ago

No surprise here. Another jennifer stan.
Jennifer is good but not great.
Your desire to worship a celebirty has clouded your perception.
I have seen this all over imdb.
Jennifer has done indies...winters bone...
So? Steve Buscemi has done countless indies where's his oscar?
Before we go any further do some research on the power of mr. weinstein.

All you need is dear ole harvey, a cute face, an indie film, and a red dress for your first walk on the red carpet.

This has been done time and time again. At least be in the know before you begin worshipping.

History is written by the victors.

[–] ssanders_colson2012 11 years ago

I don't worship her. I just happen to think she's refreshing in a world of K-Stew's and Miley Cyrus'. She has REAL talent and is genuinely likeable. The people who have worked with her adore her and all are blown away by how good she is. Is there a problem with people liking different actresses than you? It's always seemed so odd to me that people can harbor so much hatred for someone they have never met.

[–] SouthAussieLass 11 years ago

Bahaha. Sorry, but you lost any credibility you might have had the moment you doubted that Lawrence was better than... excuse me, Meg Ryan?? Are you serious? Ryan was a lightweight. She starred in a series of mediocre rom-coms, and always played exactly the same annoying, uber-cutesie, ditzy blonde. No range at all, and not even within sniffing distance of an Oscar nom.

I couldn't take anything you said after that seriously.

*Those without a sense of humour are at the mercy of the rest of us*

[–] Grizbat83 11 years ago

Ah sorry to have misjudged you. You are a Battle Royale fan so ignorance is your stock in trade.

[–] Fusion72 11 years ago

No one actor can fulfil every role imaginable.

[–] patidaba 10 years ago

sorry, but meg ryan was irritating to watch in city of angels. i'd argue that any actress would be irritating to watch in that film. no, actress could salvage that film.

who loves all people of all gender,skin color, nationality, sexuality equally?
crocodile

[–] my_unique_nickname 11 years ago

Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks are Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks.

Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper are Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper.

That might clear things up a bit.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jay_Militia 11 years ago

why not make the same statement for Josh Hutcherson, Woody Harrleson and Liam Hemsworth? she's making 4 movies with those actors. good chance she'll be doing atleast 3 movies with Nicholas Hoult, Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy too or is that acceptable because those are franchise films?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] yinloveyang 10 years ago

Whaaaaaaaatttt?!?!?!!! Those movies are no romantic comedies. Even Silver Linings playbook wasn't the same kind of a movie like those movies of Ryan and Hanks. Both Jenn and Bladley's characters had some serious psychological problems.

I have no words...so just enjoy over 2000 videos http://www.youtube.com/user/yinloveyang