Upload
Login or register
x

Comments(13):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
13 comments displayed.
Reply
-1
User avatar #2 - adunsaveme (01/12/2016) [-]
Y"know, I never understood this rubbish. "ho ho he didn't get le oscar ;-;"

You know who else hasn't won an oscar? Ian Mckellen
Reply
-2
User avatar #3 to #2 - adunsaveme (01/12/2016) [-]
y'''''''''''know
Reply
+2
User avatar #7 to #2 - necrova (01/12/2016) [-]
DiCaprio has a wider range of characters than Ian, ones that require drastic personality shifts from one to another. Just look at him in "Titanic" and then go watch "What is Eating Gilbert Grape"
Reply
-1
User avatar #11 to #7 - stankebottoms (01/13/2016) [-]
He went full retard in Gilbert Grape-that may be the reason he's gone oscarless thus far: he has full retard stink on him.
Reply
+3
User avatar #4 to #2 - klina ONLINE (01/12/2016) [-]
>implying McKellen is a better actor than DiCaprio
Reply
+2
User avatar #8 to #4 - brickfest (01/12/2016) [-]
> opinions

Also DiCaprio is still pretty young... he'll get **** ton of other chances
Reply
+2
User avatar #9 to #8 - klina ONLINE (01/12/2016) [-]
doesn't matter, he's deserved an oscar for a few performances and it's really a shame they didn't give it to him
Reply
0
User avatar #6 to #4 - adunsaveme (01/12/2016) [-]
can't you just let me ruin people's fun for a change
Reply
0
User avatar #5 to #4 - wraithguard (01/12/2016) [-]
You're probably right. McKellen has better characters, but that doesn't mean he's better as an actor.
Reply
+1
#10 - nemesisapoc (01/12/2016) [-]
**nemesisapoc used "*roll picture*"**
**nemesisapoc rolled image**Gary Oldman deserves an Oscar more than Leo.
Reply
+1
User avatar #1 - vashadan (01/12/2016) [-]
Or its the last nail in the coffin, giving him "at least something", but not actually what he was hoping for.
Reply
0
User avatar #12 - fkbskt (01/13/2016) [-]
i don't understand why he should get an award for the Revnant. Sure his acting was pretty good. The movie in general was complete garbage, completely unrealistic, and it reaked of hollywood exaggeration. dont waste your time and money in seeing the revnant.
Reply
0
User avatar #13 to #12 - trisketthebiskit (01/13/2016) [-]
well ya it had holly wood exaggeration. without it it would have been 2 and a half hours of boring **** . do you really want realism in movies? really really want it? because real life is boring as **** dude and the movie didnt exactly have giant robots and explosions or anything. there was a whole mystical native american aspect to it that was neat and the acting was great along with the effects in the movie. if your argument happens to be along the lines of "you dont get mauled by a bear then get half buried and fix a broken limb in a matter of days in the frozen wilderness" then ya i get it but it also makes you a bad person to see movies with.
 
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)