Lots to unpack, lots to enjoy. Trigger warning: Jazz drums.
The refusal of the camera to cut from scene to scene despite the film taking place over days of rehearsal and performances lends the proceedings a dream-like quality.
A thunderbolt reminder of the kind of quick-thinking, quick-talking, quick-witted characters that Keaton used to specialize in, and Iñárritu finds the right style to showcase his gifts.
Packs motion picture, stage play, graphic novel, and gossip column into one surprisingly accessible 100-minute package, tying it together with ribbons of scalding satire.
One of the most dazzling, entertaining and mind-bending films of the year.
You never do find out what we talk about when we talk about love, but this wonderfully inexplicable movie is well worth adoring.
[A] funny, surreal and moving portrait of a Hollywood star losing his mind, as he attempts to rekindle his career by staging a play on New York's Broadway.
Birdman never falters as a love letter to actors, people who paradoxically remove their masks when they step onstage.
Even when Keaton is transforming his character's stock issues into ones that feel unique and genuine, he's undercut by his director's flashiness, right up to an on-the-nose finale.
The film is, in the end, like a roller-coaster ride: it's dizzying and thrilling but you don't go anywhere. It's a series of such glittering but hollow exchanges between characters who always look and act like characters.
Birdman is desperate to be noticed, and if it throws up enough artistic flourishes, then perhaps you'll give the picture the respect it craves.
The reason this all works remains Lubezki's approach, which is the true main attraction of the show.
It's a moonstruck olio of hyperbole, reality and alter-reality, and it plays together seamlessly.
The fluid filmmaking on show mirrors the movie's dance of ideas.
When high style meets dumb ideas it can be hard to tell which way is up.
The two-hour movie may come across as a high-tech parlour trick to some, but Birdman soars even when its hero fails to fly.
Keaton's performance works beyond its wink-and-a-nod to his own Batman history, and there's even stronger work by Norton and Stone finding their own characters' vulnerabilities.
The entire cast is first rate, but Keaton's performance is one to relish and might just put him back on top.
This movie would be worth watching just for the actors, who are clearly kept on point by the long takes.
The ease with which Iñárritu blends comedy and tragedy is elegant and smooth, and the power with which he drives the film never ruins that flow.
Birdman is a strong critique of modern day Hollywood, dominated by franchises and superhero films. [Full review in Spanish]
But the film's running gag - narcissistic, insecure and attention-starved actors - eventually becomes woefully one-note.
This weird, often bleak meta-whatsit might be the closest González Iñárritu can come to escapism.
Light as an anvil, Birdman is a sometimes dazzling, often infuriating act of gaseous virtuosity. I was never sure if I should applaud or roll my eyes. A lot of the time I was doing both.
Sterling performances, a thought-provoking premise and a gimmick that doesn't feel at all like one.
Some of the big ideas about drama and about the viewing public hit home, and some get mired in soap opera.
Whatever the film 'Birdman' is this unsettling black comedy, might be the greatest comeback by an actor in film history.
...if you'd prefer to re-watch Tim Burton's 'Batman' than anything that wins an Academy Award, 'Birdman' is NOT the movie you're looking for.
It's all a bit satirical. Or maybe not. Look, over there, Shakespeare in a superhero cape!
The theater world's eloquent answer to Black Swan's equally-surrealistic exploration of ballet.
Admirably daring and filled with wonderfully vivid performances, Birdman also feels at times more like an exercise in style than a genuine emotional experience.
Michael Keaton is astounding in this brilliantly conjured piece of stream-of-consciousness cinema by Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu...Prepare to be enthralled, dazzled, delighted and disturbed.
Birdman is a one-trick pony of a movie, but what a trick. The technical achievement alone is immense.
The Birdman/ Batman thing is a cool hook that ties in well with the public perception of Keaton's career.
The humour and drama of Birdman are a slick delivery vehicle for a philosophically detailed existential crisis story, with life imitating art imitating life.
You are unlikely to see a better American film this year.
Hugely ambitious, rambunctious, loud and thrilling; it takes risks at every step, and while not all pay off, most do in spades. It's not always funny but when it is, it's hilarious. It is also highly original - and that always deserves credit.
A journey of crisis and transformation as an ageing actor (Michael Keaton) battles colleagues, family and friends, but mostly his own powerful inner demons.
A superb examination of the pursuit of validation
Filmed like a play but choreographed like a dance, Birdman is cinematic ballet.
Surprising us most just when we think we know exactly what's coming, combining humour, pathos, drama, magic realism and a potential bag of Oscars, Birdman is virtuoso filmmaking
AN incongruous, edgy and brilliant film from Alejandro Inarritu, whose dark comic tones agitate the unfathomable world of the creative actor. It's a mind-blowing affair
Propelled by a jittery jazz drum score by Antonio Sanchez, Birdman hurtles at breakneck pace between farcical backstage comedy and neurotic fantasy.
Laments the current state of the film industry through a fantastic, intimate and trippy journey into the artist's mind, where the battle between integrity and celebrity takes no quarter during an era of blockbuster movie dominance.
Make no mistake, there is magic here, and Birdman is definitely a must-see film.
Birdman is an overwhelming experience, a satirical assault on the senses that's hard to believe even as it's seen.
Despite its pretensions to be something more, the picture is most entertaining as a backstage farce.
Just as modern cinema seems resigned to cape-fluttering repetition, along comes something truly original. How often can you say that now?
Iñárritu's film isn't half as clever as it thinks it is.
What Keaton is up to here definitely issues some harsh demands. However, the pay-off is well worth sticking around for.
Birdman works best and lives longest in the memory, not as a formal experiment, but as an excellent trawl though the psyche of insecure actors.
It's a film no one expected but one for which we're utterly grateful.
Michael Keaton's performance as ex-leading man Riggan Thomson sees this former star reborn.
Birdman has wings, for certain, even if you find the feathers sticking in your throat now and then.
Iñárritu serves up a truly fanciful production that is long on characterization but woefully short in the realities of the theatre.
Birdman is a tour de force, a heady mix of dark comedy and psychic meltdown with energy vibrating from every frame.
Birdman, more than most, seems a film that deserves a second viewing, not only to admire the work of Keaton and his co-stars, but to delve into its many layers.
Lubezki's cinematography, paired with Antonio Sanchez's jazzy, percussion-heavy score, creates an atmosphere of explosive tension that lingers strongly, even throughout Birdman's more satirical and fantastical beats.
It's a quasi-religious fable about a man haunted by the past and facing a profound moral and existential crisis in the present, and it's a dazzling display of virtuoso cinematic technique and showboat performances.
Even if you don't like Birdman, you will be unable to forget its unique ability to disguise meticulous, well-rehearsed craftsmanship as irresistible improvisation.
While Keaton is a tour-de-force, Fight Club star Ed Norton is similarly rejuvenated as co-star Mike.
It is a work of magical realism, or perhaps moderate insanity. And it will take your breath away.
What gives the film its magnetism is the eerie weightlessness of Iñárritu's camera, gliding through walls and through time in a dreamlike stream-of-consciousness.
This thing flies, and even if its audience is reduced to looking up and pointing skyward, that's a pleasure in itself.
Is Birdman an indictment of Hollywood for playing to the crowds? That would be odd coming from a movie stuffed with camera gimmicks, eye candy, dirty jokes and stunt casting.
You can't help liking the mind or minds that thought the film up; you wouldn't want to close it; and you can bet money on seeing Michael Keaton, here in blisteringly inventive form, in the Best Actor suspects' line-up on Oscar night.
It's very rare you find a film unlike any you've ever seen before, but Birdman, co-written and directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu more than fits the bill.
One of the most thrilling pieces of film craft that I've seen so far this year.
Riggan is a gift of a meaty, unflattering role for any middle-aged actor, but feels absolutely tailored to Keaton's strengths, and highly attuned to his career trajectory.
The characters in Birdman don't always find redemption, but Iñárritu's faith in people has never felt more real.
A near-total fiasco from a filmmaker bent on impressing the world with his prodigious talent.
With its cast as counterweight, Birdman moves from a clever ouroboros to a passion project, rendered with confident artistic flourish.
Birdman may well be one of the saddest, strangest, and most rewarding trips to the theater you'll make this year.
While the script is funny and the characters interesting, I wasn't particularly entertained by the inclusion of Birdman. Or least by so many inclusions of Birdman.
The more panicked and manic Riggan becomes, the higher Birdman soars.
Put it all together and you've got the year's most original movie to date.
It's rare that a film can succeed on so many levels, but Birdman soars.
This is a strange and beautiful and unique film, one of the best movies of the year.
The effect is that of a single, continuous take. It's balletic and bravura work from cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki... But just as the camera floats along, so too does much else in this self-consciously clever film.
[Birdman] is audacious technically, and so meta it may well blow your mind, but it is also weird, maddening, wearing and exhausting.
The reason this scalding industry satire works as well as it does is because it has a grounding in some fairly uncomfortable truths about the movie business even as the plot indulges in flights -- literally -- of fancy.
It's a pleasing irony that this study of one actor's search for honesty has been concocted using a repertoire of visual sleights of hand. A philosophical rumination it may be but that doesn't prevent it from also being an adrenalised delight.
Like all great art, it's a journey into the heart of psychological darkness that sheds a luminous light.
There's some great black comedy here, at times spectacularly cruel. The whole, however, is at least half an hour too long and stymied by pomposity.
[Birdman] perches adroitly between dark humour and darker despair and injects a familiar story of mid-life crisis with fresh vitality and emotion thanks to vivid flights of an intensely cinematic fancy.
Brilliantly acted, sharply written and astonishingly shot, this oddball drama is quite rightly being tipped for Oscar glory.
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is the sort of movie that ends up on a person's favourite-movies-of-all-time list. It's really that fresh.
[Keaton gives] a take-no-prisoners performance that's as fearless, as exhilaratingly insane, as the movie that barely contains it.
[Birdman] is jubilant, a fantastic extended riff about people who righteously desire not just success, but a life that looks and feels like a work of art. And that's a particularly relatable theme, in 2014.
Even if it doesn't live up to its festival reviews or its crazy possibilities, Birdman serves so many heady moments it qualifies as a bona fide happening.
Mexican filmmaker Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu continues to reject traditional narrative structures with this whizzy, ambitious exploration of celebrity, art and commerce.
For all this admirably odd film's virtues, its pretensions do let it down at times.
A self-indulgent and generally tedious luvvie comedy where smug has been substituted for smart. It's a bit like those mediocre films pumped out by Woody Allen in the 90s.
We already have the best movie of 2015. I mean, I haven't looked at the schedule for the upcoming year but there's probably not much else coming out, right?
Birdman is everything you want movies to be: vital, challenging, intellectually alive, visually stunning, emotionally affecting.
Frenetic, splenetic and dizzyingly inventive.
You're unlikely to feel too much sympathy towards these self-absorbed characters and so Iñárritu's approach is to simply have fun with the scenario.
Birdman has its merits as a commentary about fame and loss. It is a finely concocted curiosity. But, we must objectively decipher whether Birdman soars or just manufactures an illusion of flight.
Annoying, obnoxious, and almost suffocatingly self-satisfied ... and still just about as much giddy cinema-dork fun as you can possibly imagine.
Keaton grabs hold of his role and tears into it with a witty blend of pure crazy and subtle nuances as needed.
... precisely the sort of movie Farber would have called White Elephant Art, with its aspirations for Oscar glory and high-minded talk about the nature of art .... I do not presume to tell you what Iñárritu is trying to say with it.
As a flight of fancy, Birdman swoops gleefully on artistic tropes and tics, but it never soars.
Extraordinary across the boards.
Keaton's intensely focused performance probably is the best of his life. Some especially moving scenes achieve almost physical impact.
Billy Wilder once said: If you're going to tell people the truth, be funny or they'll kill you. I'm guessing Mexican writer/director Alejandro González Iñárritu would agree.
The late-midlife crisis of a fading Hollywood star is the basis of this surprisingly profound and extraordinarily kinetic satire about life and success in the age of social media.
At certain moments, watching it felt like inhaling laughing gas mixed with helium.
An ambitious failure...
A brilliant and incredible look at the actor's experience, and a world that's lost its ability to distinguish between famous and talented.
Punctuated by dark comedy and occasional flights into the surreal, it's daring on a technical level, thought provoking and vastly entertaining.
One of the most unexpected and richly enjoyable larks of the cinematic year, even if the director's occasional grasps for profundity threaten to puncture the fun.
Hollywood keeps trying to convince us with each new blockbuster that we've never seen anything like this before. In 2014, it took a technically-audacious yet inexpensive backstage satire for that sentiment to actually ring true.
a tour-de-force media satire that is scattered in so many directions that it ends up wearing out its welcome
Makes you question what's real and not, but doesn't follow through. Two thirds of a absolutely brilliant film that in the end made me want to throw a brick through the screen. Goes completely off the rails.
What this extraordinary work does best is drop us into the mind of an actor beset by insecurities, vanity-project hubris, and that inner critic who simply won't shut up, whisking us up into a dazzling, dizzyingly subjective whirlwind.
To suggest that it had me eagerly leaning forward the whole time while feasting on its immeasurable details would be downplaying my enthusiasm.
This is a funny film, an absurdest comedy with great acting, solid writing and interesting visual effects. It is also a remarkable technical achievement in terms of acting, cinematography and editing.
Backed by a dynamic ensemble, a strikingly bold sense of direction and captivating original story, this is endlessly enjoyable and one of the year's true standouts.
A flawed, but undeniably thoughtful, treatise on how art and commerce collide in current pop culture.
A novel riotous risk-taking black comedy on the whims of showbiz.
It's a lot of things-a backstage drama, an absurdist comedy, a quasi-autobiographical revelation, a self-aware jab at blockbusters, a wannabe social-media age satire, and a piece of technically superior magical realism-but one thing it isn't, is subtle.
It all looks exactly like an answer to the question of what would be next from the guy who won an Oscar for the cinematography in Gravity.
The brazenly off-kilter comedy offers a blistering look at how an industry rat race can decimate a man's self-worth.
Sure, Birdman is a stunt. But that stunt pays off beautifully.
Regardless of his connection to the role, Keaton is transformative and mesmerizing, altering in moments almost every audience preconception.
Michael Keaton is a solid lock for the year's best male actor, his supporting cast is incredible and Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's play-like film is a must-see.
Hope is the thing with feathers, but 'Birdman' is the thing that requires feathers, tantrums, corridors, dressing rooms, digital effects, prowling camera movements and a dubiously punctuated pretentious subtitle to tell its story...
Every frame of this movie is spectacular.
I can't think of a movie with as much to say about the warped symbiosis between show business and society - Scorsese's The King of Comedy included.
Giddily watchable, a chain of firecrackers driven by González Iñárritu's surprising and heretofore entirely untapped facility with comedy.
It's a near-seamless concoction of onscreen surrealism that would make the likes of Terry Gilliam, Michel Gondry, and Spike Jonze green with envy.
Keaton has tapped into something truly special and deeply personal here and emerged at the helm of a movie that's a hall of mirrors that reveals a lot about us all.
Intense and immersive, it's an exhilarating visual experience for those who enjoy highly imaginative cinema.
Keaton's eternal antsy-ness is on magnificent display.
Derails our expectations of narrative and performance in the first few minutes, and keeps it up for nearly two hours.
One of the most compellingly acted and intellectually stimulating movies of the year.
Above all else, Birdman is tender, raucously funny and deeply tragic.
The sheer brilliance of Iñárritu's technique fills us with stunned admiration, even as the messy state of Riggan's head and Keaton's taut pugnacity inspire shock and awe.
A bold cinematic stretch, from its snare-jazz soundtrack to a climax regrettably stretched too far. The line between Iñárritu's genius and Riggan's madness gets crossed once too many, but no matter. Birdman has 99 virtues and ignorance isn't one.
Where to begin in tackling the numerous excellent qualities that make up the moviegoing experience known as Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)?
There should be nominations and awards for all involved - Best Picture, Director, Actor, Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor, Screenplay and Cinematography.
Michael Keaton flies high in this outstanding comedy-drama.
The crackpot Birdman on some level tells a relatable story of one person's attempt to get, for once, something right, while functioning as a useful cultural critique of the disconcerting inextricability of commerce from art on stages and screens.
At its heart, Birdman is a character drama, and it's going to naturally appeal to anyone who has worked with actors.
... both ambitious and provocative is its examination of the relationship between art and celebrity.
Equally remarkable is co-writer and director Innaritu's ability to keep it all whole, constantly coming at us, and innovatively funny.
Birdman is a plummeting descent into the depths of one tainted man's former glory while he wrestles with every aspect of his life to recapture everything he used to be. The film is slightly daunting, completely hilarious, and impeccably acted.
This is a nutty, chewy, wildly ambitious film that leaps tall buildings in a single take.
Most of all, 'Birdman' is a directorial triumph for Alejandro González Iñárritu, who also helped write the screenplay. (This is) a serious movie fan's movie.
Keaton reminds us what a fine actor he could always be.
Visually urgent, inflected by humor and enriched by savvy performances, the film succeeds on a surface storytelling level and as a deeper exploration of culture -- high, low and whatever sub-floor Twitter fame occupies.
The ambiguous line it walks between them may prove frustrating to some. But anyone who prefers their film fare to be anything but off the rack should prepare to be dazzled.
A triumph for Keaton and Inarritu. Mind-blowingly original.
A smart, full-pull filmmaking masterpiece that soars simultaneously on a number of levels.
Birdman is a true original; a work of technical wizardry, virtuoso acting, and compelling storytelling unlike anything we've seen before.
Birdman takes advantage of every facet of Keaton's talent, from his knack for absurdist comedy to his seemingly effortless ability to tap into graceful profundity without making a big show of it.
One of the wildest, funniest, most heartbreaking and purest performances on film. Ever.
Michael Keaton is superb in a role that he can surely relate to, and director Alejandro González Iñárritu crafts a film like nothing you've ever seen before.
In Birdman, ignorance goes viral.
Despite Iñárritu's tin ear for humor, inaccurate views of New York theater, and blatantly petty grievances, Birdman not only engages, it occasionally compels.
It's at different times harrowing, tragic and uproariously funny, featuring career-best performances from five or six different actors.
To make a movie that risks such obnoxiousness and have it turn out this great is close to a miracle, and also one definition of true artistry.
A daring piece of filmmaking that's as refreshingly original as it is wildly ambitious.
Birdman' is an unusual cinematic duck. A weird brew of backstage comedy, theatrical satire and surreal sequences, it is told impressively in very long takes that, at times, tax the viewers' patience.
Whether or not Riggan is in fact possessed of divine abilities-Iñárritu offers contradictory clues along the way-Birdman puts on clear display the indisputable superpowers of its cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki.
Birdman provides a thought-provoking and inventive exploration of artistry, family, and the difference between power, popularity, and prestige.
It's pretty plumage that gets ruffled along the way.
It's a white elephant of a movie that conceals a mouse of timid wisdom, a mighty and churning machine of virtuosity that delivers a work of utterly familiar and unoriginal drama.
Michael Keaton is a great actor, and he may at last have found his great role, in Birdman.
Birdman exists in that realm of cinematic thought where condemning whatever is currently popular in mainstream film is considered intellectual bravery...
Birdman is a film-lover's dream, as it gives you everything you love about movies and then mocks the rest.
A rollicking meeting of Hitchcock's Rope and Jimmy Kimmel's couch, Birdman sizzles, scintillates, teases, taunts, barks, brays, preens and careens as a simulated single-take of almost two hours, sending up showbiz and its shallowness.
A cinematic masterpiece. This is brave, original and ingenious film-making.
Challenges, surprises and dazzles while still working at the edges of a frazzled mind.
Birdman is a very unusual movie-going experience. For that matter alone, it's worth a trip to the cinema.
Birdman is a film that warrants a second viewing, if only to experience the nuances of the director's style and unique approach to his craft.
While it might not be for everyone's tastes, those who love movies about Hollywood, Broadway or just the desire to do something worthwhile with one's life will likely eat this up. (Full Content Review for Parents also Available)
A four-alarm smug assault stops Birdman from being the classic it might have been.
My, but the new Alejandro G. Inarritu movie, Birdman, has some fascinating things going on.
The magic of Birdman is that it is utterly unique while never becoming completely alien.
The movie is technically brilliant, it's beautifully acted and it's an order of magnitude more amusing than anything the downbeat Inarritu (21 Grams, Babel) has made to date.
Here is a biting dissection of people whose egos must be big enough to compensate for their soul-crushing insecurities.
I don't expect to see a lot of movies like this, nor do I want to. It wouldn't be as special otherwise.
A jaw-dropping stylistic wow that spins, pirouettes, turns inside out, and miraculously stays aloft for two hours.
Does it dip? A time or two. Does it take vivid flight? Absolutely.
Alejandro González Iñárritu's Birdman is so good, so profoundly entertaining, so confident that it makes you wonder whether the other Iñárritu -- the director of such weighty magazine spreads as 21 Grams, Babel, and Biutiful -- was a fraud all along.
Explodes with visionary ideas, adopting the language of dreams to explore and upend the very idea of storytelling.
A true work of art commenting specifically on the market that led to its creation.
Iñárritu displays a flair for comedy and shows off great technical skill but his high wire act always has that carnival barker in the background.
I want to like Birdman more, but I don't have to; it's already so pleased with itself.
The seamless tracking shot is the perfect device for depicting a cultural atmosphere defined by never quite knowing where depiction ends and real life begins. Birdman forever.
You want to latch onto Birdman's scruffy neck and fly wherever it goes, even if it's too close to the sun.
Iñárritu is a magician of transference; he strong-arms the audience into sharing Riggan's racing heart rate and roiling gut-feel.
It's the kind of daring, accomplished work that critics and Oscar voters notice -- along with all the other delectable cinematic elements to behold in Birdman.
There are many things by which one should be amazed in Alejandro G. Iñárritu's Birdman, so let's start with the most obvious: Iñárritu and Oscar-winning cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki have constructed Birdman to look like one continuous, two-hour take.
Alejandro González Iñárritu, director of such ethereal dramas as Babel and 21 Grams, counterbalances the wicked backstage comedy with surreal flights of fancy, pondering the gulf between dubious celebrity and artistic immortality.
[Birdman] is the smartest thing Keaton's done in years. And I loved him in RoboCop!
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is a running jump off the cliff of cinema into a dream-state free fall, where you wait for that dreaded moment of impact, only to wake in a chilly sweat.
Inspires renewed faith in what we used to go to the movies for - original storytelling, enveloping escape, heart-stopping camera work and enough wait, what's going on here? to keep us intrigued from beginning to end.
[Innaritu] is having fun as he winds his camera through the labyrinthine bowels of the theater like a starstruck fly, and he wants you to have fun, too.
Birdman is a strange, beautiful and loony story about passion and pain but also a crazy cool celebration of filmmaking, movie magic and all of the glorious reasons why we love watching motion pictures.
Lots of films claim to be different. Birdman is.
Birdman vividly evokes a time of equal parts possibility and terrifying uncertainty, and makes a persuasive case that, when the ground is shifting beneath your feet, the best thing to do is to take flight.
A savage satire of Hollywood celebrity gone to seed...delivered with an irresistible degree of cinematic panache.
One of the best movies of 2014.
Showy work, persistent in its effort to remind the audience that they're watching intricate craftsmanship, not necessarily an intimate study of a mental breakdown.
A strange, jagged-yet-fluid movie, wrapped in an entertainment industry satire, that's extremely direct in its frustration. Also: Every performance is fantastic.
The perfect synthesis of technical acumen with an actor at the height of his powers.
Destined to be voraciously talked about and studied for years to come. Perhaps it is imperfect, but it is also unmistakably great.
Birdman proves that a movie - the grabbiest, most kinetic film ever made about putting on a play - can soar on the wings of its own technical prowess, even as the banality of its ideas threatens to drag it back down to earth.
Watching Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu's multilayered Birdman is like unfolding a piece of intricate origami; it keeps opening in unexpected directions.
An amazing movie that delves into the worlds of theater, film and celebrity, directed with great skill and passion by Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu.
Iñárritu's inability to take it down a notch makes him uniquely unsuited to the backstage film, which requires an offhand deftness that isn't in his limited repertoire.
With a glint in his eye and a 'caw!' on his lips, Michael Keaton takes the unexpected opportunity that is Birdman and soars with it.
While I love all the smoke and mirrors, and Keaton's herculean Oscar-bait comeback beside Norton's ripping supporting performance, by the third act, I lost traction. I began to wonder: what was the there there?
For those going with the flow, it should not matter that, as in the stageplay within the screenplay, not everything fits together according to strict logic. If you believe you can fly, why then you can.
A spellbindingly unique experience that will leave you dazed and exhilarated.
The film ultimately reveals itself to be a delirious slice of meta-fiction that both sends up and sincerely explores the monstrous egos and thin-skinned mania that drives people to perform.
Inarritu unquestionably has an ax to grind and he has honed the edge.
An uneven, heavy-handed blend of darkly comic satire, drama and magical realism saved by strong performances and an ambiguous ending that leaves enough room for interpretation.
One of the most cinematically and thematically ambitious films you'll see all year.
Excellent, mature dramedy about failure, success, identity.
At the heart of 'Birdman' is a gallery of sharply-etched performances, with Michael Keaton, who leads the way, being well-matched by Zach Galifianakis.
Part backstage melodrama and part screed in the name of art, Birdman is nearly as frazzled as its protagonist...
The single take gimmick is the heart of what's wrong with Birdman - it's cool, it's catchy, it's well done, it's screamingly obvious and eventually pointless.
[The] full title is Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), but rest assured, the more you know, the more fun it'll be.
The result is one of the best times you'll have at the movies this year-which might even be the best movie this year.
Noises Off! by way of Jean-Paul Sartre.
So few movies attempt to do anything really fresh that the arrival of a picture that attempts to do several such things triggers a reflexive jubilation.
A movie with ambitions as high-flying as its superhero but a success rate decidedly lower to the ground.
The director's surrealist portrait of modern times and the cult of celebrity is brilliant on so many levels that even the occasional downdraft can't keep Birdman from soaring.
A funny, frenetic, buoyant and rambunctiously showboating entertainment in which Mr. Iñárritu himself rises high and then higher still.
Perhaps the most incisive and funniest Hollywood take on Broadway since Mel Brook's original The Producers.
one of the best movies of the year, and one of the most telling performances ever put on film
Full of strange references, self-reflexive jokes and a cast of actors playing actors, it's a maze of mirrors that shifts under your feet like a theme park ride.
By focusing on the specific problems of a man undergoing a midlife meltdown, Birdman delivers an incisive commentary on celebrity culture, ambition, social media and fractured families.
There's no question that the film gets at various flavors of modern madness with an intensity that can be punishing, but never less than fascinating.
I'm jazzed by every daring, devastating, howlingly funny, how'd-they-do-that minute in Birdman. Powered by Michael Keaton's pinballing tour de force, Iñárritu's cinematic whirlwind is an exhilarating high. No true movie lover would dare miss it.
For Michael Keaton, Birdman is some kind of gift from the movie gods, a license to have his cake and messily devour it too.
Birdman represents not just Keaton's fictional apologia but also his defiant, nearly heroic comeback.
A daring, startling piece of work. And not only for what Inarritu manages to show. But for what Keaton is courageous enough to reveal.
A movie that, while ultimately less satisfying than I hoped, features two breathtaking star turns: one from its lead actor and another from that camera, wielded by the indisputably magical Emmanuel Lubezki.
This tale of insecurity and reinvention in the backstage world of Broadway wring laughs from cringeworthy moments of frantic desperation.
It's a dizzying film, a swirl of sadness and humor and frantic thought. It's also deceptively simple.
It is exhilarating moviemaking, an out-of-the-blue masterwork that ranks as one of the best films of not just the year, but the decade, the century.
Birdman is a scalpel-sharp dissection of Hollywood, Broadway, and fame in the 21st century. But more than that, it's a testament to Keaton's enduring charisma and power as an actor.
It's undeniably thrilling to watch Gonzalez Iñárritu and Keaton aiming so high. Whenever they're brave enough to leap into the unknown, Birdman soars.
A miserable load of deranged, deluded crap masquerading as a black comedy ...
By grounding his soaring fantasy in a traditional story, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu has created his most accessible, magical film yet.
Some fresh takes on midlife crises, celebrities in America, and the wild popularity of the social media.
In Keaton's riveting, intimate yet larger than life performance, he never needs to say I used to be BIG. It's in his Birdman eyes, first scene to last.
It's a relief to see Keaton in a role worthy of him.
Birdman - which Iñárritu wrote with Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, and Armando Bo - feels as broadly ambitious as Babel, his most widely watched work to date, but without the crushing burden of self-importance.
How can you not be in awe of the sheer physical achievement, of the intricate choreography of the actors and the camera, of the gung ho performances? When it ends you go, Whew! It's a triumph of vacuous virtuosity.
It's an ambitious and beautifully executed experiment. It's a technical wonder that will be examined for decades to come. Above else, it's a hell of a good time.
Virtuosic camerawork and a stellar ensemble of actors more than make up for the occasional moment of portentous twaddle in Alejandro G. Inarritu's latest - and maybe his best - film.
The director, Alejandro González Iñárritu, doesn't tell us what to mock-or, at any rate, he knows how readily we mock what tempts us most. His film is alive to needs that never die.
Led by a fantastic Michael Keaton, Birdman is a deeply thoughtful and darkly hilarious meta dissection of egotism that satirizes the entertainment business with a compelling visual style that is all its own.
Perhaps we can consider films like Babel the necessary ashes from which Birdman had to rise and hope Alejandro González Iñárritu's ascendance continues.
It places regurgitated ideas into the mouths of gifted actors, then drops them amid a kooky story that plays like an elaborate distraction from what little the film actually has to say.
Above all, Iñárritu's Birdman is a celebration of cinema. It's an audacious achievement that floors just above every aspect of film witnessed in 2014.
A fantastical exploration of inner dialog and existential dread
May be hard to wrap one's head around, but it's easily one of the most thought-provoking films of the past ten years, maybe more.
[Inarrity] uses pain much the way John Cassavetes did the anguish in 'Love Streams': as a way of anchoring a chaotic, often very funny comedy-drama that's much more on the former side.
Birdman, with a terrific star turn by Michael Keaton, is one of the best movies of 2014.
The easy joke is that while many are touting Birdman for Best Picture, it's undoubtedly the front-runner for Most Picture. This is not a film in need of creativity, passion or energy; what it needed was restraint, consideration and direction.
Manic energy and overriding sense of fun... The lunatic performances by Keaton and Norton are the highlights.
Birdman is a raging, exhilarating howl of a satirical comedy.
Birdman may be the most artistically riveting movie I've disagreed with thematically.
Michael Keaton nabs the role of a lifetime in Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu's wonderfully strange look at an aging actor fighting to stay relevant.
...the tedious offense of idiots calling you an idiot.
But even when [Birdman's] pinballing chaos threatens to alienate the audience, Keaton's fearless, manic but tender performance draws us back in.
Birdman, though, becomes funnier and more poignant the longer it lasts.
Hubristic, humble, heartfelt and hotheaded, Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is phenomenal.
Is it a redundancy to complain that Birdman lacks soul? Maybe so.
This is Keaton's film and he truly soars as the eponymous Birdman.
A triumph on every creative level, from casting to execution ...
Iñárritu turns the film into a high-wire act - live, unpredictable, light as air, yet also fatalistically locked on course. While it's going on, you're glued to the impossibility of what you're seeing. Once it's over, you can't believe what you saw.
A technical tour de force, a beautifully performed and smartly scripted black comedy that will leave its audience keen to head back for more ...
Birdman flies very, very high.
Both Hollywood and Broadway take their lumps in Birdman, a compelling tale that's a backstage drama, a character piece, a stab at magical realism, and much more.
Michael Keaton soars in this savagely funny, strangely sweet, sad and utterly brilliant New York-set comedy from Alejandro González Iñárritu.
5/5. Brilliant on every level. Near perfect filmmaking.
I would rather get a colonscopy than watch this movie again
Great and unique film starring Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis, and Naomi Watts. Great performance and very unique story. I give it a 89%
Bird man is a beautiful tool box film. The movie uses a ton of techniques to help with the character arcs . The symbolism adds to the character arcs extremely well to help to get that from A to B. The metaphors work excellent, but some may not understand and that may take away for the experience. The metaphors really complement the long takes and the other beautiful cinematography that is throughout the whole entire film. The Long takes add realism to the film like you there and turns it into it experience. Sets of each relationship with body language and the camera angles. Theme takes on a ton of different issues relationship, addiction, and even how movies are received today. However it might not Connect with all of its audience, but from a technical view it's a phenomenal film. An amazing film, that's thought-provoking.
This movie is a masterpiece that everyone should see. It has fantastic acting, the script is amazing, the direction from Inarritu is superb, the camera work is beautiful, some of the humor moments in the movie are hilarious and the ending is absolutely perfect. The best film of 2014, hands down. P.s. Michael Keaton was robbed the Oscar!!!
Sorry, all the praise it was given, but my wife and I will never get those two hours back. Pretentious and all over the place. Keaton was great though, thats about it. I dont know what else to say.
Birdman(2014)Starring: Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Edward Norton,Lindsay Duncan, Zach Galifanakis, Amy Ryan, Naomi Watts, and Andrea RiseboroughDirected By: Alejandro González IñárrituReviewTHE UNEXPECTED VIRTUE OF IGNORANCEI'm Batman, yes I have finally seen the film everyone is talking about, a little late in the game but I don't care this film is amazing. No one gave a better performance last year then Michael Keaton as a once famous actor who tries to stage a comeback by writing,directing and starring in a his own play on Broadway. Keaton has not been this great in years, I loved tthe whole element where Birdman is in his head talking to him and that scene where he hears him and makes a mess in his room. That is worth buying this movie on Bluray(when it comes out) alone. Just hearing Michael Keaton do his batman voice again. It was awesome, when you talk about Michael Keaton you immediately think Batman much like how in this film when people talk about Riggan Thomas they think Birdman.It's about an actor desperately trying to step out of his former shadow and into a new light. Just in the hopes of being taken more seriously. It's an incredibly unique and moving film and while it's not all done in one consistent shot it's made to look like it is. This film is directed like its one continuous tracking shot and it's gorgeous. It's amazing. There is not a single actor who gave a bad performance in this. The standouts for me other then Keaton where Emma Stone and Edward Norton I just loved seeing them on screen playing their characters and getting invested. Zach Galafanakis holy crap he was great in this I mean Galafanakis can do drama who knew.This movie was captivating, original, funny, their is not enough a person could say about Birdman. I give Birdman a four and a half out of five.
Great cast dominates and carries this film, also featuring exceptional work from director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
I have to confess I did not see that coming. OK, I was expecting a great film, but not as great as it actually is. Norton and Stone gave great performance, but the life of Birdman is completely in Keaton's hands and he does an excelent job and I'm still kind of speechless about it.
While some elements of film (one shot!, casting, ...) was good, I do not like the movie.A movie about an actor, a novel about a writer, a poem about a poet or a song about a singer is a boring idea.
Birdman is a marvel of cinema for anyone who understands the art. Filmmaker's mouths will water when they watch the precise, and painstakingly brilliant performances and the elongated takes that this movie so boldly advertises. This film is proof that movies are art, and I suggest that you see it immediately if you want to see a director who loves what he does! 9/10
Very interesting directing...
The OSCAR winning Birdman helms powerful performances, a masterful script, stunning cinematography, a jazzy score, and clever commentary upon the career of it's lead actor, Michael Keaton, all of which make it a modern classic.
Gorgeous and haunting.
Absolute masterpiece. I can see why the audience rating is lower than critics,because this isn't your standard popcorn flic. This movie means business. Beautifully shot,perfectly acted,well paced. It had everything a good movie can have
A masterpiece the world was not ready for! Before you see this, be warned, it is not a superhero movie in anyway, the title seems to mislead people immensely into believing it is and audiences have given it an awful rap for it. Don't be fooled, keep an open mind, and prepare to behold a masterpiece!
J'ai arrêter après 30 minutes tant rien se passait. Excepté le dons du gars. A EVITER!!!
The greatest film on acting and purpose I've ever seen. Astoundingly shot, directed, and acted.
Um. Odd, but with great performances. The ambiguous ending was still enough to leave a smile on ones face.
Birdman astonishes with revolutionary cinematography, great performances, and a great script.
Now this is making a film with passion! An interesting storytelling where the cast seems to be exploring themselves and their boundaries while you enjoy an amazing camera work and exquisite editing accompanied with an unique and mesmorizing soundtrack. It is not only a very personal role for Michael Keaton but a statement in regards to the industry itself.
92%As technically brilliant as it is thematically thought-provoking, Birdman is a well-shot, terrifically acted, artful, completely original, but most of all strikingly intimate work that keeps its audience engaged to the very end.V: 82%
A very interesting movie to watch. Loved the camera angles and the plot. A little hard to understand at first, but slowly understood the plot after a few mins
Birdman played by Michael Keaton is about a deranged old has been actor who is delusional about his present and lives in a movie character he once played. This movie did not deserve the best picture at the Oscars. The signal dimensional camera view was edited very well and brought to the big screen a different element in movie making that is now popular on the small screen. Overall it was an ok movie with a subpar screenplay. I wouldn't watch it again.
Hard to sit thru. Viewed it with 2 others. No one liked it.
A beautifully directed, adrenaline pumping film that doesn't let you go until the final credits. Inarritu truly knows how to capture an audience.
The only thing I don't appreciate about this film is Zach galifinakis and the fake CGI bird at the end. the rest is flawless. Micheal Keaton is fantastic in this film made for both film lovers and filmmakers alike. Birdman can also be a map for critics. This is an original film with great performances and great direction.
Not sure why this film did so well. Struggled to focus long enough to finish it
The first thing I realize after watching this movie was, the people who made this really love cinema, with a passion. As an art and as vision for expression. I'm not going to lie, the 'gimmick' of the movie does and a lot to it. The fact that its shot and edited to look like one single long take for most of it, does add a new layer of depth to it. Taking that away would have lessened the film a bit. Yet, the story and acting are fantastic on their own, so the adding of the cinematic style is a plus but not necessary. That's what you must keep in mind when you film a movie with a 'gimmick.' It must work outside of said 'gimmick.' Blair Witch works outside of the found footage angle, Pulp Fiction mostly works outside of being out on chronological sync (for the most part), and Birdman works without the long take aspect. But it helps, dear God it helps.
****The movies odd, but odd in a charming way. It has a truly wonderful script. that's performed in an equally wonderful way, and the one-shot take it just mesmerizing.
I just didn't get this. It was well done tho.
This is as damn perfect as you can make a movie about showbusiness, being overwhelmed and putting pressure on oneself, and most definitely a peak into the mind of suicide... all shown in the illusion of one glorious unbroken take. It's inevitable that this nonstop anxiety, this constant moving for weeks at a time, is all going to lead to demise. And when we finally do get a break, a cut in the film, it's to assure us that this man has reached the peak of his insanity and now we're about to settle down. No, that's just the calm before the storm, the perfect effect for what is about to happen next. We are trapped in a grand delusion, what success has done to entrap our very subject. Birdman is a more proactive Norma Desmond from Sunset Boulevard, and as an aging male in the business he has an advantage over her, not to mention having worked in an era of sequels and inflated box office. His fall from stardom is something he's trying to run from, but it chases him and gets clearer as we move into the second half of the film. That the one shot illusion is used represents that this one major beat of insanity is attached to a long string of anxiety-building events - they all equate to this one moment, and one cannot possibly be disconnected from the other. There's so much meaning in that kind of staging, it's not just there to demonstrate it can be done, not a mere technical marvel, but a total view of life in the mind of a suicidal.
El uso de cámaras es un viaje sin fin, mis aplausos para Alejandro Gonzales Iñárrutu.
The single worst film I have ever seen. Legitimately one of the worst things I have ever had to watch.
I think it's needless to say, it's not for everybody. It's kinda of an artistic/cult movie but at the same time, it's not. The story is very engaging and I can't remember one moment I felt bored. The movie is filmed long-take, which is really amazing to watch, and the characteristic soundtrack matches perfectly with most scenes, so technically speaking, It's great. Also, the ending is very surprising.
This movie is a huge pile of garbage. All these hollywood stars were raving about this flick. Acting like if you did not love this film, then you do not know what a good movie is. All you actors and actresses should stick to what you do best, being told what to do and how to act. This movie should never have been nominated for an oscar let alone win. Please do not watch this, the damage is already done.
With a poignant script and a realm of outstanding performances from all casts members alike, held together by a thrilling direction, Birdman is a competent movie in any cinematic aspect, being one of those rare independents films that are capable of becoming a crowd pleaser, with its themes easily approchable by anyone who dares to enjoy them, easily being most ambitious work yet by talented director Alejandro González Iñarritu.
It's a very, very creative and stylish film about family and social acceptance.
Hated the single camera/shot. Found the movie confusing and not engaging. Didn't finish watching it
Fantastic movie with fantastic directing, screenplay and cinematography.
A Masterpiece. Beautifully directed amazing performances from all (especially Michael Keaton and Edward Norton) This movie is gonna live on as one of the greatest movies ever made.
Movie is great, until it isn't. The appearance of one long interrupted take and the script is great. However, the movie ultimately ends in a blaze of quick edits and cuts, leaving what made the first 90% of the movie enjoyable.
Outstanding cinematography. Pretty good story.
I didn't knew what to expect when I started this movie, but to be honest, that was great. This is a cinematic experience, full of marvelous crafting, It's real and intense, in a lot of aspects, really well acted and directed, shot and edited, it really make you go in the main protagonist life for a moment and it has so much to show in every single aspect. Iñárritu created a great cinematic experience that will be hard to recreate with such impact again or ever.
Masterfully directed and brilliantly acted.
Bizarre, watchable, pretentious.
So here I go finally finding time to watch this oscar winning motion picture. Five minutes into it I'm like nah ... I'm not watching this. It's killing me how boring it is but then I was like nah I'll do 4x 30 mins and I'll make it through but as I watched I'm happy I stayed. I'm not a crazy film critic but I really liked the camera, I think it was amazing and then I liked Emma Stone and the roof scenes were really the best (for me) and when she says true or dare and Edward Norton always goes true and she goes no .. true ... no ... I loved it. Overall it's a film about a lot of thing but what the hell watch it if you want to know ...
OMG! This is the worst 2014 movie. Seriously! I completely understand why critics loved it, but the audience?! Technically, Birdman is great. Great actors in their best, superb work from a well-respected director, but the movie is completely nonsense, full of hidden meanings and metaphors that no one are willing to explain. Birdman is so boring, there is nothing of fun in it. As I think a movie should be entertain or, at least, convey a powerful message, Birdman is the winner of The Worst Movie of the Year.
Interesting take on the egos of actors in the theater and the movies, with some rather strange hallucinations thrown in. Not a fun watch, but an engrossing one with a fine performance by Keaton in his Oscar nominated role.
Good film! Fairly slow and quite confusing though
Todo en birdman denota genialidad en estado puro. Los planos, dialogos, actuaciones. Ese final abierto a la interpretacion es la cereza del pastel.
Keaton is odd, but good. Interesting movie.
A surreal and moving portrait of a Hollywood star losing his mind
Probably the best movie I've ever seen.
a film about self obsessed actors playing self obsessed actors and their distain for the movie world and how they think that theatre is more important when they dont realise that the general audience want to be entertained and not go to a theatre to see actors talk about how life is harsh when most the population know this as they live it. keaton will always be know as batman he should get over it. this won best picture oscar its embarrising when you have stuntmen and stuntwomen breaking their bones for the last 60 years of cinema and they get no oscar awards whilst this awful turd wins best picture oscar. loads of popular movies never win oscars whenever i here about an oscar nominated film i stay clear as you see it once and never again. you want to get an oscar write a film about a disabled, mentally ill, genius, mixed race, jedi, religious zealout, greenpeace, female, chewbacca, regressive left wing singing sensation mute. best actor, best picture, best wooky winner.
I found this film a very hard watch. I understand a lot of people view it as something new and artistic but I simply didnt find the entertainment as I spent so much time trying to work out what was going on. This made it not enjoyable.?
Very impactful and serious, but still has enough going for it to make it hilarious. The acting is superb and the film never has a dull moment. Everything adds to character and plot, which is what lots of modern films are lacking and just think they can make a story with characters that aren't ever extended upon. The style of the film is also very unique to itself. The way that a majority of the film feels like one consecutive shot is a masterful art, and definitely adds to the experience of the film. And that is what this film is. An experience for the ages. This is definitely one film that will go down in history.
Did you know the leading actor also played Batman?! Crazy!
I absolutely love this movie. It had good humor, and was a philosofical movie. The cinamotography was absolutely amazing, and no cut is noticable. 5/5
Birdman has some moments of sheer brilliance but I was left feeling that so much more could have been done with its brilliant and wacky premise. In the end, I couldn't help but feel that I'd been promised something more than what I ended up with: sub-plots build up and then disappear never to be seen again, and behind all of the flash, some of the key themes are surprisingly unoriginal.Still, to call this film unoriginal would be a lie- it's beautifully-shot, well-acted, and thoroughly engaging. For some, it will just be pretentious but that's always the risk when you try and do something new. For me, it was tedious at times but not due to it feeling pretentious but rather because I WANTED MORE OF A SUPERHERO MOVIE. Say what you will but I wanted Birdman to become the star and he never really did. As I watched, I was sure that it would happen but beyond a few dream-like sequences, Birdman just wasn't featured enough. This film was perfect for Michael Keaton and I just wanted to see him in that ridiculous suit a little more often. SEQUEL.
horrible movie, just horrible
shooting the whole movie in almost one continuous shot still doesn't have to make it a great movie even if the acting was on a high level.
Im not an expert, of course!, I´m just a cinema fan. But i can say I don´t really like Birdman. It´s briliant at moments, and at other ones is really slow, full of complanings and of crying artist babies. I loved some scenes. I liked it´s photography. But i can´t say I loved this movie. Iñarritu was screaming look at me, I´m the best film ever and clearly it was not. But some of you believed so. And deep in your hearts you know is not that good.
Great Story, Superior Acting, and Excellent Camera Work Birdman is easily the best film of the year. Keaton will defiantly deserves the Oscar
This movie tries way to hard to be thought provoking and deep, but overall it's not that terrible. I love the camera work in this film.
A philosophical work of art.
One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Dumber than dumb
The film, I personally thought didn't have much to offer, other than an okay story. But the build up to the ending was amazing, the ending as well, the performances by Michael Keaton and Edward Norton just help it much more, and the fact it was shot in an amazing way, so the entire film felt as if it was shot, in one shot, just makes it better.
Showing the side to show business many do not see, Birdman surprises audiences with an actors comparison of his dreams and the reality he faces each day.
Was alright but i expected more action...but that was in his early-life . Interesting for once .
Fast paced and beautiful.
A plight of the fading hero who has done super hero movies wants to hit back and is craving for the love and attention as an actor. He goes to the extent of selling his property for raising money for the play to prove himself as an actor. Technically film is brilliant especially seamless tracking shots . Acting department everyone excels. A movie must watch.
Did you really hear something coming ?
I think Birdman, has some of the best Cinematography and editing in a movie to day and has well as ever hitting the big screen. This movie achieves in camera work (Emmanuel Lubezki) and editing ( Stephen Mirrione and Douglas Crise). They make this movie amazing and the casting in this movie was just icing on the cake. The only problem I had with this was the script ( Alejandro González Iñárritu, Armando Bo, Alexander Dinelaris, Nicolás Giacobone) even though It won for best screenplay. I think it needed most work, but I really like the concept. My review for Birdman Review: 8/10
Special effects-laden and stuffed with stars, Birdman offers an intriguing behind-the-curtains look at theater that'll surely entertain aspiring actors and stage performers, but there's a little too much going on to the point where we're left more overwhelmed than excited.
Alejandro González Iñárritu , the first Mexican film director to be nominated for Oscars has created movies that have resulted in hit after hit with critics everywhere and his newest project is certainly capable of continuing that thread. His newest offering is Birdman, a film which proves that technical aspects can make just as big an impact on audiences as plot and characters can.Birdman (or the unexpected virtue of ignorance) follows faded film star Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) who is directing and acting in an adaptation of What We Talk About When We Talk About Love on Broadway in New York. Despite his high position in the play however, Riggan's profession is anything but enjoyable; he often argues with his colleagues, and his relationship with his daughter Sam (Emma Stone) is fragile at best. Riggan dreams of returning to Birdman, an eighties superhero series that made him famous and as we see, this dream has become an obsession, creeping into his mind at several moments to feed his ego for acting. The film mostly follows Riggan as he interacts with the other characters and makes preparations and rehearsals for the play's opening night. The pacing is as tight as it gets for a drama; there are no slow scenes where little happens or any moments that take place a day or two later. The film stays on task with the plot it sets out to convey and as such, never loses the audience's attention; you just can't take your eyes off the film because there's always something going on. The film's only real problem is that towards the end, many of the characters who played sizeable roles and had strong interactions with Riggan don't really receive any kind of payoff. Does Mike Shiner (Ed Norton) overcome his arrogant ways? Does Lesley (Naomi Watts) go on to something bigger on Broadway? None of these questions are answered as the film focuses its entire attention on concluding Riggan's story. Whilst Birdman's ending does leave a lot to be desired, the journey there is more than worth it, laced with a wide array of humorous and memorable moments.Despite not getting the closure they deserve, Birdman's characters are all very well rounded and interesting. Keaton is very intriguing and charismatic as Riggan Thomson, arguably one of the best roles he has had in years. Playing off both his obsession with Birdman and his management of the play, it makes for a highly unpredictable character arc; will he return to the series that made him famous or will he step back into the spotlight some other way? I found Riggan to be slightly similar to the character of Willy Loman from Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman in that he finds himself absorbed in his visions of Birdman; these scenes do a great job of emphasising just how much the Birdman character means to the protagonist. The other side characters played by Ed Norton, Emma Stone and Naomi Watts may not have as much focus as Keaton but they all bring their own talents to the film; Norton as the arrogant, full-of-himself Mike Shiner and Stone as Riggan's recovering addict daughter in particular have some great chemistry on screen. All told, it's clear the cast members of Birdman are working at their best to make the character's presence felt throughout the film.Birdman's cinematography is simply a stroke of genius; outside of three other takes, the film is shot without any kind of normal transitions. The camera continuously and constantly follows the characters, transferring seamlessly between scenes as they move about the different rooms and areas of the theatre environment and when the action is confined to a static location, such as when the characters are rehearsing the play, the camera will rotate, giving a varied view of the proceedings. The film's use of a single take means that we never leave the perspective of the characters and the film's pacing is always moving forward, keeping the audience engaged. The interesting techniques don't end here; there's also an extensive use of mirrors during character conversations which places greater emphasis on the emotive side of the cast's performances. Drums and other instruments enter the film to signify the more intense moments and a minimal use of computer generated imagery is present to put across Riggan's wild imagination and desire to return to the titular superhero he was once renowned for. Overall Birdman's presentation compliments the plot incredibly well, tying in with the hectic nature of putting on a play at the theatre.Aside from a lack of closure in its ending, Birdman is nevertheless a very well-crafted movie; the cast all turn in brilliant performances, drawing you into the story and the film's fascinating editing style is something that has to be seen to be believed.
Odd, original, and completely engaging. Alejandro González Iñárritu cemented his excellence with Birdman. Taking a glimpse into the lives of Broadway actors, we find that the life isnt as glamorous as it looks. The cinematography of the film was brilliant, as there were no cuts, and the film flowed beautifully. Micheal Keaton and the rest of the cast put on incredible performances that may actually surprise you.My one bit of criticism of the film, however, is due to the cheesy scenes towards the end that I felt distracted the flow of the movie and felt a little too comical. Otherwise, Birdman is a brilliant film that will hold its own for years.
Following through on the extreme long takes, Birdman dives into a man's psyche, sharing stage presence with mental presence, in a way that is insightful on several technical and emotional levels. The execution and direction are top-notch with a great sense of artistry over the achievement behind this film's screenplay.
Boring and uneventful
An extended camera trick with people acting really hard in front of it. It craps on superhero movies, yet the best part of the film is why they spoof the genre - until that gets ruined with some flying metaphor. Artsy fartsy nonsense.
Blew my mind! And my nose!
Michael Keaton delivers a career resurrecting, layered performance as a washed-up superhero movie star trying to reinvent himself. We are presented with some impressive cinematography, and bold direction from Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Birdman works on every level as an impressive piece of cinematic storytelling.
I feel I am never going to get those 2hrs of my life back...going by all the 5 star ratings in the reviews I also feel I have missed something, but for the life of me I don't know what?...absolute shocker of a movie!
This is a one-of-a-kind film in many ways. The execution alone is enough to keep attention, and the score is simple yet beautiful. The performances from Keaton and Norton are exactly what one would expect from actors of that caliber. The supporting cast was great as well, but I really, REALLY didn't like Emma Stone in this movie. Normally she is a solid actress, but her whiny, boring character felt one-dimensional. Overall, this is a movie everybody needs to see as long as you have the right mindset going in.
astounding cast, camerawork that could be set with the word eyegasm and a simple story that can be extended with your own mind. The movie isn't perfect but it is a five-star movie and definitely worth cheking out.
I can see why this won so many awards; the acting was stellar, and the plot was well thought out. There are so many elements of this film that you can pick apart and talk about from a film's perspective. Loved the concept, but I just somehow didn't fall in love with it.
I don't get it. why the hell does everyone like this awful movie?!
a very good movie with amazing cinematography and admesfeer
This an actors' film in the best sense. The performances of every actor are magnificent, the dialogue is sharp and witty, and the story features some jarring, and often humorous, visual tangents that reaffirm the film's lofty artistic ambitions. These things, paired with a one-of-a-kind shooting style, combine to make what is not only the best film of the year, but a new addition to my personal favorites.
While it has great acting, its a fucking boring movie.
This was a really interesting performance for Michael Keaton, and the supporting cast are very strong as well.Well worth checking, as it's one of those films that actually lived up to the hype surrounding itRental!
Here is my favourite movie
A film about a theater production, with some quirk thrown in.God Performances and interesting throughout
Still upset Keaton didn't walk away with BA for this.
Great camera work. Also strange and depressing.
Some films are great cause they show restraint and a minimalist design...Birdman is not that type of film. Director Alejandro González Iñárritu has thrown in everything plus the kitchen sink for his latest picture, a visual-feast and poetic satire that's as thorough as it is ambitious. Shooting the film in the appearance of a single long-take (with the most subtle of cuts), Birdman's cinematic flourish actually accentuates it's themes regarding artistry, as it makes the film carry the look of a play, only wistfully projected through the world of cinema. Iñárritu also comments on virtually every spectrum of the entertainment world here (criticism, budgetary-concerns, low-brow vs. high-brow), yet the movie never feels messy, and wraps it all together in a truly sublime and uplifting fashion. Carried by a wide-range of familiar actors (many of whom are gloriously breaking their type-cast here), the film remains highly accessible and entertaining even when most cerebral, and in many ways it resembles the perfect comic-book film that Hollywood has tried so long to film. An ensemble dramedy masterpiece, that can join the likes of Boogie Nights and Pulp Fiction as an instant classic!
Good movie but a shitty ending tho
Very strange and out there, but well worth the watch. It'll have you thinking throughout the whole thing. Keaton's performance is incredible.
It's a shame i didn't get the chance to see this in the theatres, When does It come out on DVD? Hopefully soon enough!
At the conclusion of Birdman, I said, THAT won Best Picture?. I found myself nodding off a lot in this confusing, odd and bland film about a faded Hollywood actor who hallucinates. While I condone it's brilliant cinematography and acting performances by Michael Keaton, Edward Norton and Emma Stone, the movie was dreadfully boring with nothing there to keep you entertained. It's 2 hour plus run time feels more like 4 hours. The ending made no sense. I can't believe a crappy movie like this beat The Imitation Game and Boyhood! For shame, Academy!
Meta in so many ways, Birdman is, besides its technical achievements, a suffocating tale about the perks of ego and success in an artists life.
Absolute crap. Unwatchable. Typical of an Oscar-winning movie - as in the public has no idea why shit like this could win anything.
the worst movie ever seen
Intriguing and original. Darkly comical and still completely unique, and lives up to its ambition really well. Too many standout performances to count. Easily the best film of 2014.
This film was not what I thought it would be, but I was not disappointed. Birdman has everything that most modern movies lack; wit, integrity, originality and realism. This is a beautifully directed film by Alejandro Iñárritu and the script is so good and the chacters so interesting that talking scenes are just as investing and exciting as any action sequence. The performances in this film are great too, Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone and the rest of the cast all give intriguing performances that perfectly suit their characters. Birdman is incredibly clever character study and a modern classic.
Seeing Michael Keith and as a superhero again, awesome!! Seeing Alejandro Gonzalez film is very breathtaking, very unique cinematography all the way. What a very very catchy yet so unique's screenplay. I love this film and I definitely deserves his grade. Great Cast, Great setting, I love the way that they're giving a wink to the critics out there. Grade A perfect 10
So Birdman is a good film with a good cast but the film was extremely weird and somewhat depressing in a way. What I liked about the film was the use of the one long continuous shot that was one thing about the film that made me keep on watching it, I thought that the whole idea of the one long continuous shot was very artsy and you don't see that a lot in other films. Michael Keaton is a great actor and I'm going to be honest the role of Riggan was great for him he plays the part extremely well but Edward Nortan stole the show if you ask me his performance as Mike is probably one of the best performances ever (next to Fight Club (1999)). Birdman is an ok film but if you like films that are artsy and don't mind slow films I highly recommend it.
This is why I should never look forward to anything. A terrible movie providing the anticlimax of the year. Don't believe the hype, this movie is terrible. If I did not like Keaton so much I would have been harsher.
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is not only the best film of 2014, but one of the best films ever. PERIOD! This movie is masterfully directed by the incredibly talented Alejandro G. Iñárritu who puts his heart and soul into everything he does. The brilliance of the movie's plot and structure can only be surpassed by the brilliance of the actors in the movie. Michael Keaton gives the performance of his career as the ambitious Riggan Thompson who is desperate to leave a legacy that doesn't include a birdmask and a weird spandex costume. Edward Norton plays ... well, himself, basically, but he does that in the most wonderful way you can possibly imagine. The cinematography is off the chain as the movie continues for many different sections without making a single cut. The beautifully crafted poetry that is this movie definitely deserves all the accolades that it got and even more to it.
I'm not sure if this was wackier than I was expecting or not. Either way it was out there from the opening with Riggan levitating in his underwear the film was a roller coaster ride. Just hang on and enjoy.
Has to go down as one of the most awful movies in history , pulling my own finger nails out with pliers would be more fun than having to watch this awful movie again
La inesperada virtud de la ignorancia: Como me gusta llamarla, es la dramaturgia detrás de un dramaturgo frustrado. No tiene nada que ver con un superhéroe, sino de alguien que lucha contra sus propios demonios. Un relato en segunda persona que nos cuenta hasta dónde puede llegar el surrealismo a una persona, y cómo puede afectar su intento de revindicar su vida y su carrera. Nada mal para haberse ganado un Oscar como: Mejor Película, Mejor Director y Mejor Guión Original en 2015.
Excellent achievement in filmmaking. This film explores so much. It goes into self esteem, fame, criticism, relationships it has so much to offer and its visual storytelling was spectacular. It's way of conveying is extremely unique and well thought out. Acting was also phenomenal by Keaton, Stone, Galifinakis, Norton, Watts it was very pleasing. The script is consistently moving with the camera and the direction is amazing. Alejandro Gonzalez Inñaritu is a great director and this film was spectacular
The sense of humor in this movie is bland, barely follows an actual story line, and the ending leaves you miserable and confused regretting every minute you spent watching this piece of shit movie.
My absolute favorite movie of all time. Michael Keaton is incredible as well as Edward Norton!
Birdman is just like an artistic description of an illness, and just like any other descriptions they're not really fun to follow
Technically a masterpiece, but also with a great cast.
The camera work is this film is refreshing.
Interesting performance from all the actors, they are totally feeling the movie, they make art. Still, the story it's a little bit off in some parts, but bottom line, it's a great movie.
I mostly hated this. Really, really hated it.
Fantastic film one of Michael Keaton's best performances it really showcases just how tough the acting industry can be
Cinematography is perfection. Iñàrritu is one of the best directors out there, giving the viewer a cinematic experience that won't soon forget. Michael Keaton and Norton are dynamic. Birdman provides the humor and thought provoking dialogue one craves.
Funny with Michael Keaton and Alejandro's Direction in the works
Over ambitious, but what makes it different is also a strength. I know i basically contradicted myself. That's what this movie will do to you
Birdman reminds me of how awesome film is! Film is important (if done right) it shouldn't be treated as something just to pass the time, it should be treated as something part of life and Birdman excellently proves that. Michael Keaton's performance is powerful and you feel for him, Edward Norton is awesome as usual and so was the rest of the cast. It pokes fun at movie cliches, film critics as well as the actors themselves! Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu has proved once again that he is one of the best directors working today and Birdman is one of the best films I have ever seen!
This is a film practically made for directors and actors in equal measure. From the dauntingly ambitious task of editing a film to give it the appearance of being a single Steadicam shot to the general cinematic ambiguity, this is clearly a film for creative minds. However, the overwhelming volume of brilliant performances from this top notch cast makes this a must-see for actors.There's nothing I could say that someone more eloquent than myself hasn't already said so I'll leave it at this: This is a brilliant masterpiece about the line between character and actor, and the masks we wear to hide our true selves from the world. Some of Inarritu's best, even if it does feel more like a Malick picture than an A.G.I. film.
Last Action Hero: The Stage Version......The Movie.
How do you even start to evaluate Birdman? It's definitely the weirdest movie on the list of Best Picture winners. It's excellent cast and masterful cinematography make this comedy an experience.
Loved this movie. Smart script & very smart direction.
Well if this just isn't one of the best movies I've ever seen. Spectacular performances. Really intricate camerawork that makes the passage of time and transitions feel so fluid. Interesting paradoxes that constantly interrupt your expectation (i.e. the pounding of agony is actually a high school drumline on the street). At every turn, Birdman is taking chances and changing the game. As for the movie's end, I cannot think of a better way to wrap together the two realms that we are presented with throughout the film (the actual, and the supernatural). With Riggan's success in finally achieving what he wants in life (a nod to the opening card), his daughter looks down in horror, then up in delight--acknowledgment that he has left Birdman behind and is finally a person of self-significance and worth. Is he dead or is he flying? The answer is simply no. Audiences who crave concrete answers will be frustrated by the movie's metaphysical end. But the metaphor is just so beautiful.
Notable for the long sequences and for the use of the camera by Gonzales Iñárritu, that I think surely deserved the Oscar for his amazing work. But apart from that, I didn't fint involving, and maybe also the characers could be well developed.
Alejandro González Iñárritu's seemingly-one-shot epic is a triumph in film and a stunning technical demonstration of what can be achieved in film. It boasts powerful characters with spectacular performances from nearly every single actor featured, an impeccable script with excellent execution of dialogue, a gloriously-unique soundtrack, and a hard-hitting overall effect that will leave you utterly floored.
Never have I been so caught up in the flow of a film. Literally.
If I could I give it 0 stars
This movie is incredible.
Though the ambitions of the meta-referencial, post-whatsit symbolism may be jarring at times, Inarritu's art critique is never overwrought, and never really takes away from the simple pleasures offered by the vivid script, complex characters, wonderful camera-work, funky soundtrack, etc, etc, etc.
this is for movie insiders, not me
I could only make it through the first 30 minutes and had to turn it off.
Birdman is a high-concept, visually stylish film with a well-written script and an excellent cast.
Technically brilliant, but lacks an interesting/flesh-and-blood story to keep the movie structured. Birdman is a thrilling leap forward for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, and it is an ambitious technical showcase but aside from that it has very little to offer. While I personally do not believe this film should have won Best Picture, it is still a fine film due to incredibly strong and personal performances from both Keaton and Norton. It does get a little impressed with itself at times, and has about ten different endings before concluding on a ambiguous note.
Completely original, hilarious, and technically astounding. Birdman is one of the best films of 2014. 10/10.
birdman' operates with a persuasive contention of the ego and psyche that is mightily aritculate, yet misunderstood from how it's commonly grasped. a top-drawer cast and sinuous cinematography can easily be taken for granted. few films as homely as this symphonize a better look at people sensing reality independently, sometimes breeding conceit, while analysing their views' causes and effects. incredibly original.
Absolutely outstanding work from everyone involved. It's very easy to sit back and enjoy the artistry of what is presented before you. Emmanuel Lubezki made the whole film look as though it were shot in one take. The performances by every actor are superb. And the direction of Alejandro Iñárritu is matched only by himself. If you don't like this, you don't understand the art of cinema as a visual and immersive medium of storytelling.
This film has a awesome style of cinematography which appears to be one whole shot for the whole movie it is quite unusual to see but is genius as it gives you the feeling that your actually there experiencing these events. okay this film is weird but is really unique and original. michael keaton in this film was great as he is in most films however this film does seem to drag a little at times.
One of the best films of the decade,a funny, entertaining, visually impressive and plain weird movie featuring an excellent use of the camera angles and a great performance from Michael Keaton
Absolutely great. great characters, visuals and spontaneous. It was tense and I loved the flow of the film. The subtlety was great. Edward Norton was great. Proper loved it. Fresh milk, two sugars.
Awful beyond comparison.
Very entertaining, fun, and extremely engaging.
BirdmanIn the past few years, people were more and more addicted to the internet whether using their phones or computers. There are a lot of social media around there, such as Twitter, Facebook or YouTube. In Birdman, there were several plots showed that how can these media impact a show or a person. Moreover, how can a voice in your head influence you? That's what this movie was talking about. This movie happened on New York Broadway, which talked about a washed out former star. He always heard a voice from a character he used to play, which was Birdman. The movie is based on this to tell a story of this guy's life. Riggan (Michael Keaton) was a quite famous actor who used to play Birdman. He started his new career at Broadway, and these days he started rehearsal his first show, but there was an extremely creditable movie reviewer whom would write a bad review whether she watched the show or not. And then there was the first emergency that they needed find a new guy to substitute another guy that accidently got hit. The actress from the show, Laura (Andrea Riseborough), said she knew Mike (Edward Norton) who was quite famous at that time can substitute the gap. Mike's acting was quite awesome, but his behavior was not that pleasant. Along the time, Riggan always can hear a voice from 'Birdman', which he hated, talks to him and wanted to convince him he is Birdman. Throughout the whole movie, there were several points always remind Riggan that he is the Birdman. For example, when he was in a bar on Broadway there were few fans wanted to take photo with Riggan as a Birdman player, and then when he naked walk through the Time Square there were some people wanted his signature and photo. These parts made Riggan think he might be the birdman in some ways. When Riggan was struggling with his first show, his daughter said a lot of stuff to him. Such as, ' it's not for the sake of art. It's because you want to feel relevant again. Well, there's a whole world out there where people fight to be relevant every day'. Due to this talk he started thinking what he really wants. When they were rehearsal, Mike told Riggan he could easily find out he was using a fake gun, and then during the real show he pulled outa real gun and shot himself. That made everyone know him mostly from social media, but in the movie Riggan doesn't like social media, but the fact was the social media helped he a lot in his first show. It also showed that nowadays people are addicted to their online social life. Using drumbeats as the background music were quite impressive, because the beats lead the tempo of the movie and would make audiences and movie have a strong connection. With the drum, audiences would get more into the movie. Furthermore, the whole movie was a continuous one shoot, therefore, all actors had to be extremely related. It's quite hard for all actors, because they all had so many lines to remember and they all needed a good acting. Moreover, the only one take style might make audiences thinking during the whole movie instead of just watching a movie not even thinking.I think this movie is more like adult movie, which the parents better not bring their children to watch it. In the movie there were some clips about drugs, smoking and sexual related. Maybe parents can go watch it as a date night movie.
Birdman tells the story of an actor (Keaton), famous for playing the iconic title character, who is experiencing difficulties in mounting a play on Broadway.There is no arguing that this was one of the coolest films I watched in recent years. In addition to simulate a single continuous shot, there are so many amazing things going on that I really consider a cinematic experience.Keaton's performance as the troubled actor, facing his own alter ego, and trying to make ends meet with his career and his family is absolutely great.A film that deserves countless views for its courage, its technical level and most of all its originality.The film won 4 Academy Awards: Best picture, director, original screenplay and cinematography.
Excellent film. Powerful acting. Great concept. Really makes you think. Very enjoyable.
It was really weird. Keaton was unbelievable and probably deserved the Oscar, but the film itself, you either really enjoyed it or didn't. For me it was the latter. I just couldn't get my head around what was happening. Norton and Stone's roles were also really good.
brillante una de las mejores peliculas que he visto,la mejor
Michael Keaton is mentally ill. I do not know what people see in this movie. It is a bad, horrible movie.
one of the most interesting and engaging movies I have seen.
Spellbinding dialogue and stunning cinematography meet a tearing critique of modern Hollywood and movie culture in what is easily the movie of the year.
Continuously very interesting and watchable without ever managing to cross the line into being something I loved - maybe the uniformly self-centred and unlikeable characters had something to do with it? The kind of thing that badly needs to be written by Charlie Kaufman to catch fire, but sub-Kaufman is better than no Kaufman at all.
A uniquely styled film that is no doubt we'll directed. However it is underwhelming and unsatisfying even with the stellar performances.
Complicated, but good
Riggan (Michael Keaton): Just find me an actor. A good actor. Give me Woody Harrelson.Jake (Zach Galifianakis): He's doing the next Hunger Games.Riggan (Michael Keaton): Michael Fassbender?Jake (Zach Galifianakis): He's doing the prequel to the X-Men prequel.Riggan (Michael Keaton): How about Jeremy Renner?Jake (Zach Galifianakis): Who?Riggan (Michael Keaton): Jeremy Renner. He was nominated. He was the Hurt Locker guy.Jake (Zach Galifianakis): Oh, okay. He's an Avenger.Riggan (Michael Keaton): F - k, they put him in a cape too?This was a strange film, good but weird. Michael Keaton was amazing and unsettling at the same time; but everyone of the cast members- Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Naomi Watts and even Zach Galifianakis were all brilliant, they played their parts perfectly and were perfect for the each of the parts they played in the film. Overall, this was a little confusing but there were some nuggets of wisdom that was worth sitting through the haze of confusion. It was good, maybe deserves a second viewing to be fully understood; although I sincerely doubt I would ever consciously seek it out to watch it again, but if it happened to be on, I may give it another try.....maybe.
A Hollywood parody about Broadway with an existentialism and surrealism that is almost like poetry.
It's impossible to review this movie fairly, cause everything you can say about it, are tags, and tags are part of what this movie is against. Abrilliant perfomance from Keaton, outstandingly written characters; a ride thats worth the ticket and the time, but a masterpice just for those with very specific taste for black humor. Definetly not for casual movie watchers.
No for everyone, i love it
Birdman is downright bizarre, and after a first watch I'm not actually quite sure it deserved to sweep the Oscars so convincingly, despite it being really rather good. You can see a hell of a lot of parallels between Michael Keaton's role and his own personal experiences after playing Batman twice in real life, especially when Birdman plays itself a little too on the nose with the I quit in 1992 jibe. This is an actor who you could argue had barely attained relevancy in twenty years, and here it really works for him, pushing character Riggan to the actual brink of insanity. You can also believe that after the whole Incredible Hulk debacle that Edward Norton really is that kind of ridiculously anal arsehole to work with. With its ingenious one shot camera trickery, no doubt you will feel a touch confused and perhaps even struggle to match the rather frantic pace of Birdman. And I think that while really enjoying it, I don't quite love it yet. Currently it just feels like it thinks it is far more clever than it really is.
Not really for mass audience. (Watched 01/02/16, downloaded)
Just one thing: The best movie i've ever seen...
Strange tale, enjoyable all the same
a pitch black comedy film only able to be seen to believe or describe, Birdman is the kind of film that should really wake Hollywood up and make Kenton what he should have been called all along, a respectable actor.
An OK movie. More ore less a mediocre take off of Death of Salesman. The films ending lacked courage.
El mejor plano secuencia de la historia del cine
Perhaps Inarritu's best film to date. A self-consciously dazzling technical feat with themes that bounce off each other in vibrant ways. A brilliant cast is headed by Emma Stone, Edward Norton, and a never better Michael Keaton
Wasn't sure what to expect but this film far exceeded my expectations. Smart, funny and at times very moving. Keaton is beyond amazing and the rest of the cast are also terrific. Just brilliant.
A witty, dark, and beyond it's years film that is brilliant as it is creative in terms of narrative, story, and artistic outlook on the minds of those who seek to make it however that may be.
A movie that is obviously based in real life of michael keaton works perfectly,michael keaton is not the only one who makes a awesome performance enma stone, zack galifianakis,edward norton and others bring uss great potencial in a shoking,dramatic and well planed show with great scenography and use of cameras
I'm blown away by how boring this film was and how many people liked it. Just not my cup of tea
This film is arguably the most meaningful film this year so far. The way it explains humans existence, aggressive emotions, and the sense of redemption. This is how art film need to be.
I didn't understand this movie :'(Cinematography was cool though.
Sensational cinematographic ð'?ð?»
Mitä odottaa leffalta, joka on saanut vuoden parhaan elokuvan Oscar-palkinnon ja IMDB:ssä joko kymppejä tai ykkösiä? Todella erilainen, tuore tapa tehdä elokuvaa. Juoni eteni rullaavasti kameran kulkiessa mukana. Päivät, paikat ja henkilöt vaihtuivat lennossa. Satiirinen, Hollywood-kriittinen tarina, joka sijoittuu teatterimaailmaan. Voiko entisestä superhero-leffatähdestä tulla uskottava Broadway-ohjaaja. Kaikki oli tehty hienosti, visuaalisesti erityisen kiinnostavasti, mutta silti leffa jätti vähän kylmäksi. En saanut tästä niin isoja fiiilareita kuin olisin toivonut. Soundtrack oli myös erikoinen. Pääosin rummuttelua. Hauskaksi asian teki se, että taustamusiikkina kuultuun rummutteluun imestyikin muutamassa kohdassa selitys, jossain nurkan takana piileksivä rumpumies, tai kadulla kulkeva paraati. Nauratti. Vaikka ei tämä sinänsä mikään komedia ollut.
This movie is certainly different. It is not something that everyone will find interesting or even watchable. As for me, I liked it. Didn't love it. I loved how it was made, and much of the performances in it, but it left me with more questions than it should have.
This movie is incredible. Can't even explain. You should definitely see if.
Awful on a scale that is difficult to imagine. The characters are completely unsympathetic. The plot is so over-written that I am surprised that they did not have sub-titles in capital letters screaming out every point. The only reason that I can see that it got recognition in Hollywood is that it played on every actor's anxiety.
Amazing, memorable film.
Movies about people who make movies are always overrated by critics, this movie was ok, that's it.
A watchable movie with very good cinematography. However the soundtrack was infuriating at points as the off beat drum beats where just at the wrong place wrong time.
Honestly, I absolutely loved this movie on so many levels. A+++++ TOO GOOD
One of the best and most original movies I've seen in a long⦠long time!  Birdman is a thought provoking, beautiful piece of satire that is destined to be classic. Michael Keaton gives the best performance of his career and this is some of the best work Edward Norton has done in a while. Birdman is about many⦠many things. Actors, Broadway, good for nothing kids, you name it. Films that are about many different things usually lose their focus. However Birdman keeps its focus and strives for greatness⦠and achieves.  Alejandro G. Iñárritu continues to improve as a director and puts all of his talents to work here. The ensemble is incredible Keaton, Norton, Galifinakis, etc. all give great performances. This is also a very good looking film with excellent cinematography from Emanuel Lebezki (hope that's correct). And the score is fantastic as well.  Overall Birdman is a bold and original film with greatness all over the board including acting, directing, cinematography, and more. However Birdman is not for everyone, but if you love movies Birdman is for you!2014 may have been a great year for comic book movies but it will also be remembered as the year the art house struck back!
A great film with wonderful cinematography, camerawork, performances, and narrative. One of the best dramas of the 2014.
With a well-chosen cast and a dynamic plot and setting being provided, Birdman is proudly an achievement for the 21st century.
absolute pretentious b.s. not witty, not charming, not thought provoking. it is literally a movie that is begging to say look how deep I am, and ends up falling flat as a piece of nothingness. gets 2 stars because atleast the acting is great. but the story and screenplay itself? garbage.
Stupid ending and just overall weird and a bit vapid, While it is nice again to see Keaton, Norton, and watts, the movie itself stunk. I liked the play on batman with bird man and the acting was good, but that's about it. I really didn't care for the jazz or the constantly dizzying camerawork. I didn't like the fantastical ambiguous parts either. I definitely did not like the predictable gun shot and then retarded obscure flying ending. Very one-dimensional side characters-The greedy agent, bitter critic, understanding wife, self-absorbed actor, druggy neglected kid, etc... I didn't like the script that much either. Lots of stupid clips of behind the scenes Broadway that felt forced, edgy, and trying too hard to be cool. This one is for the birds. I recommend seeing a real Broadway show than this.
Birdman. A hyperactive expression of breathless cinematic exploration and filmmaking magic. See it the first time for the endlessly entertaining story. See it again to catch the parts of the story you missed the first time. See it a third time to marvel at the way the camera moves, and doesn't stop moving (the first cut comes an hour and forty five minutes in) throughout. After that you still haven't seen all there is to see.I have no idea how they pulled this off, visually and otherwise and in a way, I don't want to. The fever dream of the year.
I just didn't get it. exhausting to try and follow the movie with the continuous shot format, and I'm not an actor and most of the political commentary on acting and definitely went over my head. wouldn't recommend
The story was slow and shallow.Didn't even finish watching this.
WOW! This is a masterpiece of a film that explores honesty, the search for human identity and purpose, the line between character and actor, and becoming confident with one's self, and that's really all I can say without regurgitating what everyone else has said. I'm at a loss for words. Inarritu has created something enormously special here. An absolute master work that can't be missed!
Birdman is an stylistic and original movie of many wonders; the cinematography, direction, writting and score being the standouts. It is funny, witty, melodramatic, self-absorbed,tragic, absurd, fast-paced, dark, exhilarating and emotional, all compacted in a curiously cavalier story about an egocentric man who is looking to reinvent himself. Michael Keaton gives a grand and fitting performance which humanizes this otherwise despicable, overly complex individual. Yet, I personally preferred Norton´s and Stone´s performances, as both give the film a soul and voice by portraying unconvential supporting characters. Overall, Birdman is a great achievement of great filmmaking.
an ambitious, surreal, brilliant work of filmmaking that showcases the true talent of Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu. Michael Keaton and Edward Norton and Emma Stone give career defining performances in their roles and command the screen everytime they're on it. a beautifully and masterfully shot movie that needs to be experienced. truly like nothing I have ever seen before.
Not necessarily my cup of tea, but well shot, well acted, and a pretty good story
Simply superb cinema set in surreal surroundings.
So in 2014 a piece of crap came out called boyhood and everybody was like omg this is the most unique thing ever! To them I say birdman! Birdman is one of the best films of 2014 and is the most unique film of 2014. I think norton and Keaton owned their roles. I wasn't into Keaton in the beginning but loved him 20 mins in the film and then really loved him when he have that shitty critic (whom I really hate as an actress and in the movie) a piece of his mind. I didn't have any problems with it except that I thought emma stone was just good not great in it as people said. The cinematography is what stands out the most, one shot to rule them all! Overall from its story to its one shot this is a must see. This also gets a five because Micheal Fassbender was in it!
the way they act is very nice but the story was very boring
A fantastic, enthralling, and interesting view on the world of Broadway theatre. The one shot take filmography showcased is pleasing to the eye and to the mind. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's spotlight into the movie scene that gives his career a headstart.
Keaton is great and is surrounded by a talented cast, a bit sluggish at times, but still a great movie. I really enjoyed that Micheal Keaton played a superhero in real life as well, it made me appreciate this one a little more
Superb satire of fame and the insecurities around it. You have to admire the camerawork in this movie, there's some wonderfully shot sequences throughout.
Refreshingly unique. Inarritu has created a masterpiece that combines all the elements, screenplay, acting, music, and storytelling into a compelling mixture. Keaton is perfect in this role. One of my favorites.
Love it. Movie of the year for me. Original, darkly funny, dramatic, and visceral, it makes you go deep, perhaps too deep into yourself and wonder, how relevant am i?. Amazing one shot style continuity effect, an incredible work yet again from the already legendary Lubezki, and not less of the greatness expected from Iñarritu. Michael Keaton delivers the performance of a lifetime, with great interaction from a spot on cast, particulary Edward Norton and Emma Stone.
Best movie I've seen since American Hustle.
OH MAN this film, for me at least, marks the start of Oscar season - what an incredible cast all put into a FANTASTICALLY shot film. taking its cues from Rope, the film sets itself up as one long single shot, that spans the production of Michael Keaton's ex-Birdman putting up a play to revive his career, all while struggling to remove himself from his self-pity and false victimization. the supporting cast (Edward Norton) is looking REAL strong and I'd be honestly very surprised to see this film miss out on some serious recognition. for the film buffs, the edits are fairly easy to spot, but the takes are still crazy long - up to 15 minute long shots rather frequently. this is a film that looks so well behind the curtain at being an actor, an artist, and a public figure (both super and regular) so it's well worth your time.
Some great acting here. Michael Keaton was fantastic. I felt in love with Edward Norton's character here as well. Starting to like Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu work a lot. In terms of the story of the movie, it was ok for me. One scene reminded me of black swan. However, I do not know if this was the best movie that year though as the Oscars announced. I mean the movie is about acting. I bet the oscars were a bit bias. Don't you think?
What a damn interesting film, Still trying to grasp exactly what I saw on the screen, but I think I saw a one take film with complicated yet fascinating and funny dialogue.Norton is friggin fantastic and Keaton kills it.He's a struggling actor who was known for his performance in a film called Birdman, that still lingers around him. The movie is somewhat attached to him and defines him.The movie is really just a fascinating showcase For witty dialogue on the night of a play that Keaton's character is putting on.It's a blast to see everyone interact because the cast of characters are all extremely different. It's a clash of personalities and one fresh take and it seems to be a one shot film.
Fantastic. Original. Michael Keaton knocks it out of the park.
I loved this. Not quite sure what to make of the ending, but the one long tracking shot of a man rapidly losing his mind was incredibly effective. The performances were roundly fantastic.
Acted, Directed and shot really very well, do not want to spoil anything.
A brilliant film that explores people's need to be loved. The performances are mind-boggling. This combined with the stellar cinematography makes Birdman to be one of the best films of the 2010's and one of my personal favorites of all time. This is one thing f the few films that gripped me from start to finish and had me leave the theater actually smiling. This film reminds me of why I love the movies.
Birdman is a character study of a washed up actor who is trying desperately to stay relevant and try to balance his split personality (birdman) so it will not consume Him.
That was 2 hours of my life I won't get back.Wasn't for me. I didn't really think much of it. I don't see what was the hype was all about.
An example of great film making.
I don't think I've ever seen a film so relevant to today as Birdman is. In an age of endless sequels, remakes and blockbuster films taking all the money at the box office, here appears a film acting as an indictment of said blockbusters with endless layers of meaning that go outside the film's universe and into the real world, in a way that reminds me of Adaptation (2002). Everything in this film will have meaning to different people. The amount of subjects it broaches and relevant issues it talks about is staggering, but it never gets too obvious, the world of the film very easily shoulders the weight of all its different themes, from commercialism in Hollywood to its more personal, character focused ideas of insecurity and happiness. Alejandro Inarritu's direction perfectly matches the script he wrote, as we get long, rehearsed to naturalism single take shots that mimic what a stage play would feel like. The characters are all three-dimensional, they have flaws that need to be worked out. The actors all inhabit these characters without a shred of ego, Edward Norton and Michael Keaton both embrace their characters who are reminiscent of themselves, in both good and bad ways. In the end we get a film that is perfectly written, a vision captured perfectly and executed perfectly, outstandingly peformed by every actor and that explores relevant ideas and issues that everyone involved in the filmmaking process deals with on a daily basis (but doesn't forget the audience in terms of the execution of its ideas either), making it fully deserving its Best Picture Oscar.
Weird, captivating and a great performance from Keaton
Layer upon layer, Birdman delivers a dark and thought provoking message that can be interpreted from various angles and can still make a logical and satisfying tale.
When the movie ends you feel a mixed of emotions, and you try to say this movie is extraordinary but you can't because you don't understand all the movie, so you start to think and take your own conclusions. The movie is bright, is bright see how a man can decline and stand up again and is bright how wonderfull is our mind to keep memories of a talented past, that memories who can talk to us from time to time.
The acting is superb, visually it's a beautiful piece of virtuosity. What lacks is a certain direction, which leaves the movie uncertain of where to go and leads to different possible interpretations. Normally that wouldn't be a problem, if the movie could tell you at least if it's a comedy or a drama or or a cynical depiction of the show-biz or of these times in general.
Keaton is fastastic as well as the cinematography/direction
The true beauty was in its Effortless transition from scene to scene. The film was executed perfectly, unfortunately the movie was a little too buzzard and over hyped in my opinion.
Where are your underpants?Riggan used to be a star actor and play a notorious super hero known as Birdman. Eventually, he thinks he is too big for the role and spins off into a new career on Broadway. His show sells out and is popular, but he often fights with the cast, he lacks professionalism, and is depressed that he likely made the wrong decision to stop being Birdman. A voice in his head leads him and chaos follows.Why did we break up?Because you threw a kitchen knife at me.Alejandro Gonzales, director of The Revenant, Babel, 21 Grams, Biutiful, To Each his Own Cinema, and September 11, delivers Birdman. The storyline for this picture is an interesting character piece with many unique elements, unexpected action, and random events. The acting is very good and the cast includes Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis, and Naomi Watts. Smells like balls.This was added to HBOGO a couple months ago and I was excited to finally get a chance to watch this. This was different and surprising in many ways. I really enjoyed the script and thought it was well done. This is a movie you will likely only need to see once, so I wouldn't add it to the DVD collection, but this is worth your time and entertaining.She does look like she licked a homeless man's ass.Grade: B+/A-
I cheated a little bit here: I'd actually seen the first 10 minutes or so of Birdman before, but switched off for one reason or another. It certainly wasn't alienation that turned me to tune off: I had been itching to watch it properly for a long time.Revisiting was a very, very good idea. If you haven't seen this Alejandro G Iñárritu (Babel and the upcoming The Revenant) beauty, stop reading this garbage and get cracking.If for whatever reason you're still here, I'll continue. The plot is simple to grasp: Riggan Thomson, played by Michael Keaton (who of course played Batman) is a washed up action star who used to play the titular Birdman in a series of superhero movies. There's more to him than it seems though: he displays ambiguous signs that his superhero role may not have been an act.In a bid to reclaim his stardom and financial security, he is running a play on Broadway in unison with Jakes, his lawyer and chum played by Zach Galifianakis of the Hangover fame. Galifianakis is on form, playing a more intellectual role than that he is typecast in, akin to his role in the excellent but short-lived TV series Bored To Death.Throw in an array of extra talent, most notably Emma Stone as Thomson's troubled daughter and Ed Norton as an acclaimed Broadway actor drafted in at short notice to star opposite his girlfriend, played by Naomi Watts.Each share screentime relatively evenly behind Keaton, stealing scenes in their own right. As the show's opening night approaches, with preview after preview performance, the pace of the movie continuing to increase accordingly. Characters and their storylines intertwine into a complex but very coherent mess.There are constant shouts to theatre throughout, almost as though this is a play recorded for the silver screen. Researching online, it seems rehearsals were rigorous to get the flow of the film down to an art. The hard work pays off. The start is jarring: you're thrown in at the deep end, but you're soon up-to-speed and glad of your front row seat.The cinematography is subtle yet stunning (it did win an Academy Award for cinematography as a nod). It's appropriately dark and moody backstage, and bright when the cast take to the stage.Each shot is stitched together seamlessly. Every transition is sleeker than the last, often following a character out of one room and into another down the winding corridors of the theatre. It's deliberately fast-paced, claustrophobic, and a thing of beauty.Solo jazz drumming is the only real music here, interspersed between each 'scene', the term used loosely. It's noticeable louder and panicked in times of stress, and soothing in rare moments of clarity. When the movie approaches its conclusion, the music reaches a peak.The conclusion, whilst perhaps erring towards anti-climactic, is still a triumph. For a film that builds up to opening night, it doesn't disappoint. You aren't left wanting more. Every loose end is tied up nicely.It's more than satisfying end to a treat of a film. But this is more of a film. This is a love letter to thespian farce, a worthy Oscar winner and a time investment I'd gladly make again. The only tragedy here is that I won't get to enjoy this for the first time once again.
eden odlicen, isklucitelen poseben film... duri zacuduva kako Akademijata mu dala Oskar, dali konecno se opametile ili? :) Filmot vsusnost e solo jazz tapani na Antonio Sanchez :) koj ne gi poglednal filmovite na Alejandro González Iñárritu, ili neznae koj e likov, ne probara po netov koi filmovi se gi ima napraveno, i ke mu stane jasno vednas kako se rodil Birdman :)
Sobrevalorada, es buena, ingeniosa, original, pero no llega a ser trascendental.
Frenetic, chaotic film movement reflecting the character's state of mind and desperation as he confronts his mortality.
Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone and the rest of the ensemble cast were great. The story of a former top billed actor on the fringe of a mental breakdown while attempting to reinvigorate his washed up career by financing, producing and starring in play that he also scripted was compelling, though the seemingly one continuous take of this 119 minute film could have been tidied up with less runtime, I felt the foreshadowed inevitability to be a bit drawn out, since I found myself checking my watch around 87 minutes in. This was a good movie but not worth the critically acclaimed praises it received.
Impressive filming, well acted, great writing,
Was looking forward to this film, a weird, odd and very pretentious film which I've got no doubt probably got rave reviews and won a number of awards, however it was too much for me, too much inner meaning and not enough of the obvious that I enjoy in a film. A work of art maybe, an enjoyable film, for me no.
Exceptional movie! An EXPERIENCE! One of the best of this millennium.
One word: EXHAUSTING!Fucking weird ass movie.
Great concept filmed perfectly perfectly acting funny strange but it's one hell of an experience
Brilliantly acted and conceived!
Wow, this was a raw and powerful film! I can see why it won the Oscar for Best Film. It was very artfully shot and powerfully acted. It was a very interesting critique of Pop culture, blockbuster film franchises (particularly superhero films), Hollywood, and modern life. Being that it was a critique of Hollywood and blockbuster films that never get recognized at the Oscars, it makes sense why the Oscars chose this for film of the year. It sums up what many on the more artistic and thought-provoking side (not Pop side) of the film industry find wrong with said industry. And it is probably the only Super-Hero movie that will ever win best film. Quite fitting! Even though I like some of the big Blockbuster film franchises, I can tend to agree with much of the critiques of it and I greatly enjoy quality, deep, and artful films as well. Unfortunately they tend to get overshadowed by the big budget franchises of the world. But they get their shine at the Oscars. However I wouldn't mind seeing a big budget film franchise rise up and win the big award (other than Lord of the Rings of course). I'm looking at you Star Wars! Anyway, Birdman = pretty good film!
Beautiful cinematography and surreal postmodernism.
Como q demasiado bien hecha para ser obra de alguien con Ñ, el ruido de Birdman viene generado por la propuesta cinergética q plantea. Principalmente, desaprender todo lo q sabíamos sobre las películas de 1 sola toma -cuidadosamente ideada con el fin d te guste a juro-, al punto d pasar a ser la verdadera protagonista.Poco después, (el 2do. aire de?) Michael Keaton, Y trás él, la confunsión entre dos mundos + un guión soberbio + el mundo del teatro + un score recurrente como sello + escenas clave a su debido tiempo + toques de humor / erotismo / locura / y uno contundente de efectos visuales ... una voz... una crítica a la cifefília... El mérito del Film radica en la carga de elementos q dominó al mismo tiempo (y para los entendidos, es el triunfo clásico de ser escritor, director y productor).Birdman es tan buena, que ya veo a los productores de shows pariendo por escoger cuál de toooooooooooodas las tomas van a poner en la transmisión. Ah! Y sobre su analogía con Batman, es un 'must watch' para los fanáticos patológicos.Brillante!! 9/10.
I don't deny it, this movie will leave you pondering... pondering that you might have used the time better watching some Hollywood blockbuster, really. Dingy and depressing, I'm sure that there are far better movies out there that bring forward cleverer ideas.
A full star just for the historic cinematography. Very well done film overall.
While ridiculously impressive on a technical and performance level, the tone of superiority and snobbishness that seems to permeate the dialogue and message of the film, along with a puzzling ending, make this wonder of cinema come across a bit pretentious.
Revolutionary in its camera work, Birdman also brings scathing dialogue and impressive performances. Funny, intense and thought provoking, you can see why it won Best Picture.
Birdman is a film you won't forget very quickly. Every scene was captivating and essential to the mind-boggling story told.
What a ride ! Tension from beginning to end, just like in a great play.
I wanted to like it, but unfortunately found it pretty boring. While it was very conversationally driven, I felt it still lacked a depth. There was no subtext conversations between people. Everyone very simplistically spoke their mind. It was a movie about Hollywood people who think their life is far more interesting than it is. Having worked there, these type of film ideas come up a lot. So if you enjoy staring at people's egos in a low action movie this movie is for you. If you like movies that rely on the shock value of nudity or obscenity for any interest then you will love this movie.
Curious, bizarre but eventually also rewarding.
Birdman is a good film, it's an entertaining film, but it's not a great one. Despite all the praise Keaton and his fellow cast mates deserve, and the incredible direction from renowned auteur, the one thing Birdman can never fully shake off is the strong sense of Oscar bait. Keaton deserves any and all kudos for a soul-bearing, challenging role. Alfonso C's direction is assured and precise; he brings to life his eccentric plot effortlessly; his long, drawn out sweeping shots are a marvel, and it never misses a beat. Yet, Birdman's tale is never as grand as it works so hard to sell itself as; the result is everything feels so unconventional simply for the sake of being unconventional. It's a shame the more memorable elements here are how hard everything just feels like a great big push for award glory.
This movie is hard work.
Keaton is back. That is all.
I have a love-hate relationship with this film. Generally I dont like the award-winning films, it's a curse or something.
Great acting and is impressive from a technical aspect but despite all the great things about it I felt very detached and not emotionally engaged in any of the characters. Norton's character seemed to just fall off the face of the earth part way through and the drum score was obnoxious and got in the way of some of the dialogue. I'm sure plenty of people get more out of this than I do and I do respect it but I just didn't love it.
Birdman is one of those rare films that comes out as trend setter, brave and irreverent, not just there to seek the safety of cliche in an attempt to ensure box office receipts. Right from the start we are asked to go to work, for we see Riggan levitating in meditation. Is he really levitating? Is he an alien? A magician? Is he just imagining he's doing this? And there's also someone else in the room, for we hear a voice, but no one else seems to be there, at least physically. Eventually we see that it's Birdman, a successful character Riggan has played in the past (and that's what drives the film, the need for success and acceptance of audience and critic to validate one's existence as an actor, that success being made evident in Birdman, the voice driving Riggan on). The film is full of flair and the engaging. One technique used is the almost dreamlike, surreal coming in and out of characters. At times the characters even ignore what's occurring immediately to emphasize the surreal. There are also great moments of dark comedy in statements made that, unlike forced comedy in comedy-specific genres, are so sincere that the viewer can't help but guffaw. And if you like drums, you're in for a treat, for the scat beat of Birdman (allusion to Charlie Parker, not a drummer but jazz artist) plays throughout a good portion of the film. This is Riggan trying to get back up on his feet, to get his career restarted, but most of the film that's not happening, represented by the sputtering drum fills. It's quirky. It's whimsical. It's poignant, funny, and just damn mesmerizing. The acting, the oft thick dialogue, the angst, the manic passages, all work in combination to make this a most joyous experience. Oh, so is Birdman an alien? Can he really levitate and use telekinetic powers? Is he going insane? Is he hearing voices? Is it all just made up in his mind? The film gets you thinking in that direction until the final moment of the final scene as Sam spy's her father out the window apparently fluttering about high above the streets below. Or is he? Ya just got to love a film that can keep you so off balance and so engaged. Birdman, a true flight of wonder.
If anything has ever earned the label of pretentious, it's birdman. The editor was robbed of an Oscar though.
Masterpiece. Great decision for cinematography to support theatricality with noncut like in real play. Great work of actors, selection of sound. A lot of magic details. And a lot of questions to yourself. 10/10
Its definitely a movie that will stick with cinema goers and buffs, but its just not that great overall. There's two highlights, Keaton and Norton. That's it.
Pretentious and disappointing.
best movie I've seen in a while
La ganadora del socar,no me termino de convencer,sobre todo por el final,aunque tiene cosas interesantes. 6/10
Fantastic piece of cinema which delves deep into the psyche of a modern film star who has faded into irrelevancy.
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is a brilliant directed film by Alejandro González Iñárritu, who manipulates the camera to give the illusion that the film is one continuous long take (which can get dizzying at times) giving a film that is resonate to a modern day audience as it examins these fictitious characters and their commentary on what it means to stay relevant. The film is a deep character study of Riggan Thomson played by a moving and stellar Michael Keaton a once-time big movie star struggling to regain importance in his contemporary setting while trying to establish himself as an artist worthy of praise and to get rid of his Birdman image. Not to be underrated are a game Edward Norton playing Mike Shiner a popular Broadway star and Emma Stone as Sam who delivers such a moving monologue on what it means to be relevant and to leave a lasting legacy. This to me is a film that is the epitome of first class movie making.5/5
At a time when the studios appear reluctant to produce anything that doesn't have certified provenance, along comes Birdman, an entertaining, ambitious and mostly effective backstage satire that delights in mocking Hollywood's franchise obsession.Directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu (Babel, 21 Grams, Amores Perros) Birdman is the story of Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) a has-been Hollywood actor - once famous for playing superhero Birdman - who seeks to restore his artistic credibility by directing and starring in an ambitious Broadway show - his own adaptation of a Raymond Carver short story What We Talk About When We Talk About Love. When one of his actors is hit by a falling stage light and is replaced by the egocentric loose cannon Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) Thomson now has to battle not only his inner demons (his Birdman alter ego) but also a shameless scene-stealer.To add further weight on Thomson's shoulders, his manager/producer Jake (Zach Galifianakis) is stressing about the very likely possibility they'll both come out of this venture broke. His daughter, Sam (Emma Stone), has just come out of rehab and is angry at everything. His co-star/girlfriend, Laura (Andrea Riseborough), thinks she may be pregnant. And his other co-star, Lesley (Naomi Watts), is in an insecure lather about her first Broadway performance. On top of all that, the New York Times theatre critic, Tabitha Dickinson (Lindsay Duncan) has taken great offence at Hollywood setting foot on hallowed Broadway turf and has vowed to kill his show with the worst review she has ever written.Iñárritu has shrewdly pieced together Thomson's existential crisis as if it is one long take - though the actual time frame of the story takes place over a number of days. Accompanied by a kinetic all-percussion score by Antonio Sanchez, cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki takes us on a ride - up corridors, through windows, across stages, along New York streets - that is mostly exhilarating. The first forty-five minutes or so are a delightful mélange of energy, humour, music, movement and sharp performance. I was grinning, realising I hadn't been so entertained at the movies in a very long time.But while the film as a whole never quite loses its steam, its narrative drive does soften and Iñárritu tends to rely a little too heavily on his showmanship. The barbs regarding the superficiality of Hollywood grow repetitive, as do the denunciations of Thomson as a worthless hack. Subplots are underexplored. The characters of Jake, Lesley and Laura are underutilized while theatre critic, Dickinson, is afforded too much weight and her anti-Hollywood rant is anachronistic at best.The 'look-at-me' flashiness is sure to be dismissed as pretension and the relative thinness of the plot may leave some unsated. But through the smoke of this collision of ideas, technique and tones is the brilliance of Keaton. Sure, he was made for this role, but what he brings to Thomson is so much more than what is in the script. Angst oozes out of every pore. There isn't a whiff of inauthenticity about his anxieties though his rapprochement is too easily realised and the film's resolution is unnecessarily abstruse - and perhaps a little too affected.Keaton's supporting ensemble is fantastic. It's refreshing to see Galifianakis successfully navigate a straight role. Emma Stone proves once again she is the most interesting actress of her generation right now. Watts reminds us that she truly is an actress of substance. Riseborough is both funny and empathetic and sure to be on our screens a lot more in the future. And Norton is hilarious, skilfully treading that fine line between parody and overacting.A cynical eye could easily unpack this film and expose its flaws. But to do so would be missing the point. Birdman is intended as a delicious ride. Its adrenal affects will naturally subside once you leave the cinema. But Iñárritu demonstrates that superheroes are not the only protagonists who can entertain and attract an audience. Indeed, this extremely damaged and fragile hero not only does that, he does what those other caricatures are unlikely to ever do - touch people and win awards.
If you saw the ads for Birdman, you saw a better movie than if you sat through the whole thing. Half way through I almost turned it off, but I stuck with it hoping it had something, anything, to offer. But alas, there was nothing there.Birdman offers us two things. The first is a pouty, childish lashing out at comic/franchise action movies which really reeks of nothing but jealousy, from both the movies main character and the director. At one point during the movie I even wondered if Keaton was the director and writer, pining over his forgotten Batman performance and maybe Birdman was autobiographical. While comic action movies might not be to everyones tastes, they do at least provide entertainment. The sad, dreary, lifeless intellectualism the movie seems to crave, without offering, is probably best sort after in books, and even plays, as those mediums have little to offer visually. But whether it's special effects or amazing cimematography, movies must be visually entertaining. Birdman even fails this, wasting movie money on a story best suited to a short opinion piece in a newspaper or blog. In fact, I don't like comic franchise movies is everything the movie has to say, without the 2 hours and the budget.The other thing Birdman attempts to give us is an examination of psychological breakdown, which it could have done quite well if it wasn't trying so hard to be preachy about entertainment being entertaining instead of dreary. But what effort and integrity the movie had to offer on this issue, was thrown away with the sappy, magical ending where the psychosis comes to life, which seems to be the kind of thing the movie just spent nearly two hours complaining about. If you want a movie about psychosis, Fight Club does a much better job. In fact it's sad to see Edward Norton in Birdman after watching his brilliance in Fight Club.One of the worst movies I have ever seen, one of the worst stories I have ever heard, and if I had paid to watch this instead of seeing it on tv I would do like Stan and Kenny and track down the people who made it and demand a refund.
'Uma coisa é uma coisa, não importa o que é dito sobre esta coisa''.
birdman is an ambitious film mastered by excellent performances by michael keaton and edward norton...it does create an atmosphere as to what the hell is happening around but it moves ahead of the typical pshycological thrillers and keeps you intrigued till the very end...its truly a deserving oscar winner for me without any complaints.
Should have walked out 15 minutes into it. Tedious to watch or endure.
A Brilliant Film. The only reason it doesn't get 5 stars is because, well it's no Citizen Kane, but otherwise excellent.
Comedic, very performance driven, and very heighten music. This is very great on its genre.
Hmm, it was alright...
Birdman is a dark, grim story of redemption that showcases an amazingly fluid screenplay, powerhouse performances from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton and an enchanting, layered story that unravels and is also ironic for Keaton, which adds to the film.
Birdman is a bit of a strange film in that I both liked it and disliked it simultaneously. It tells the story of Michael Keaton who plays a washed up actor trying to make it big with his broadway play. His daughter treats him like an asshole, his costar kind of IS an asshole, and his attempt to reinvent himself seems to be failing. The film tells the story linearly, but in a way where time jumps forward without any specific indication. The camera work is fluid, relying on a constant long-take approach facilitated by steadicam and giving the film a dream-like quality. The acting is quite brilliant, with Galifinakis, Stone, and Norton really standing out in my opinion. The soundtrack is also fantastic, featuring some really groovy jazz tracks and some brilliant classical tracks including Ravel's Pavane (a personal favorite). So why do I dislike the film? Well... The subject matter is, in my opinion, fairly shallow. There's a lot of emphasis on some deeper spiritual/philosophical meaning that feels patched together rather than properly explored. The long-take steadicam work is well done, but I found it unnecessary and distracting, waiting for cuts instead of paying attention to the film. Everyone in the film is barely relateable, coming across as shallow and self-absorbed. The film strives to be surrealistic, a style I love a lot, but something about the combination of elements made this film feel like it was using surrealism as a crutch to obfuscate the otherwise thin story. TL;DR - 5/10I'm probably going to be crucified for my review, but that's fine. This film is simultaneously great and horrible, but that doesn't mean you won't end up really enjoying it. I highly recommend checking it out at least once to get your own opinion, because although I'm not the film's biggest fan, I do consider it a worthwhile film, especially in today's relatively shit cinematic landscape.
I really like the indie theater feel. The parallels to Keaton's career are great. This would have been hard to pull off with another actor. Very good.
Most over rated self indulgent Hollywood crap. Devalued the oscars to be nominated let alone win.
Original & captivating ode to theater
9/10A play within a play revolving around an actor looking to become a legend as an artist, rather than a superhero actor, but also an introspective look on western civilization and our lack of interest in broadway, but with loud booms, explosions, cinematic fights, and CGI, it makes one think.
Breathtaking and refreshing, it deserved its Oscars.
I rarely ever have anything negative to say but this is without a doubt the worst movie I have ever seen. I believe the numbers are fudged and way off.
This movie with minimal plot has some unusual elements but drags in some scenes. With solid performances and a strong final section, it kept me guessing and wondering. AAW 1001. D
Birdman is a film that I personally enjoyed. Michael Keaton turned in a amazing Oscar nominated performance as a struggling actor trying to put on a production with some very distracting distractions.
I did not give Birdman a second thought until it started receiving a ton of Oscar hype. It just goes to show you how good marketing and campaigning for an Academy Award can attract viewers of your film. Although somewhat confusing and disoriented, the movie actually is rather solid. The performances shine in Birdman. Michael Keaton, Edward Norton and Emma Stone all give great performances in this movie. I honestly did not know that Michael Keaton had a strong acting performance in him like this, so that was very refreshing to see since I have always been a fan of his. I personally thought 2014 was a weak year for movies and especially Oscar contending movies. Was this the best movie of the year ? Probably. Did it deserve the Oscar for Best Picture? In a weak field that it was, yes it did.
Fan-fucking-tastic movie! It's like a really good play made into a movie. Brillant.
I have to admit, I've never seen a movie like this before. It teeters between science-fiction and the reality of a washed up screen actor. Made even more enticing by a continuous free-flowing steadicam movements. It's incredibly unique and beautiful. An all-star cast to boot. It's one of those movies that would get better the more you watch it and dig into it's vast undertones & layers. Not for everyone, but still remarkable.
Birdman is an amazing 2014 drama film. Birdman has got stunning acting from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton. The plot to Birdman is great, there are no scenes in the film that are boring or ridiculous, and every scene is awesome. Pretty much 90 percent of the soundtrack in Birdman is played with only the drums; some may say that this is stupid. I thought the soundtrack in Birdman was incredible, with only one instrument it makes scenes exciting. I highly recommend you watch Birdman as it is an amazing film of 2014. And I give Birdman a 9.5/10.
Find something wrong with this movie, I dare you. Spot on cast and a great story!
It's funny it's akward the movie have great acting and it's one of my new favourite movies!
Your in theater, honey. Don't be self-conscious.Birdman soars in a new direction, bringing Hollywood along with it. Inarritu's film is beautifully filmed, technically ambitious, and hands-down perfect. Philosophical and more relevant than we'd like to think, this is a story of a fading celebrity who lost his soul to blockbuster Hollywood and who tries desperately to redeem himself. On-top of this its a look at Michael Keaton's career (who gave a powerful performance). Somewhere hidden in the middle, this story is also about us (viewers) and how we openly appetize on Hollywood fluff. Throw into this mix an ensemble cast and the outstanding performances each one of them give - and you have one of the best films of 2014 (if not the decade).
A star studded, ultimately forgettable party trick one shot, drunk on it's own sense of intelligence. Huge redeeming quality of the movie has to be Lindsay Duncan.
One of the years best films. The cinematography is breathtaking and the film also has a great story and acting. Michael Keaton obviously shines the most in the film, but Edward Norton, Emma Stone, and Naomi Watts are also great. Bird man is a superb movie that is so enjoyable to watch.
...an amazingly executed comedy possessing a vaguely interesting satire, great ensemble acting and has a masterful technique of continuity. It is a film that never slows down in delivering fun-filled and strangely astounding awe. It is something incredible enough for what it is but could be appreciated even more if would be given a shot for a second viewing. Or perhaps even more.
Mejor pelicula del 2015
People want action, guns, explosions. Not this talky philosophical bullshit. That is what makes this movie great, it makes us explore our minds. The virtue of ignorance.
11/29/2015: An ok film with a spectacular cast. I'm not into art house type films, so I didn't find the movie all that great, but it was worth watching once.
Michael Keaton IS JUST BRILLIANT. Plays a deranged but true artist.
O mundo dos holofotes é tentador. Há muitos que caem na armadilha de achar que só porque vira uma figurinha conhecida pela mídia vai ter a vida fácil. Porém, o que essas pessoas esquecem é que, quando a câmera está ligada, tudo é uma maravilha. Basta sair de cena para o inferno vir à tona. Birdman ou (A Inesperada Virtude da Ignorância) - sim, o título é esse mesmo - conta a história de Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), um ator que já fez muito sucesso no passado, mas que hoje busca se reconstruir profissionalmente com uma peça que pode custar toda a sua carreira. Nisso, vemos toda a tensão psicológica que assombra a mente do ator, que só piora com o decorrer do filme. Iñárritu, o diretor, utiliza-se de sua metaficção para criticar o cinema moderno e seu público, que parece dar mais valor à filmes de ação exagerada e sem nexo algum, esquecendo dos valores tradicionais da sétima arte. São várias as referências que ele utiliza aos atores de grande sucesso hoje em dia, coincidentemente os mesmos atores que dão vida à personagens retirados de histórias em quadrinhos genéricas. Talvez essa tenha sido a jogada fatal de Birdman, porque no mais, é um filme como outro qualquer, chato, pra falar a verdade. Nem mesmo as excelentes atuações de Keaton e Emma Stone serviram de muita coisa. Eu não gosto de desistir de um filme depois que eu começo a vê-lo, mas confesso que fiz força para aguentar esse até o final. Sim, se você assistir com atenção, verá que o filme tem sacadas geniais e que eu estou exagerando, mas não posso elogiar tanto um filme que quase me fez dormir. Quem sabe a minha mente ainda não esteja presa em uma fila de cinema às sextas-feiras.
The most exquisite film I've seen and it's brilliantly different. What a wonderful masterpiece.
Pretty great. Weird, but great.
This movie is wildly original and unique. Amazing performances, a very well written script, amazing direction, and characters that are relatable. The metaphors that were wrapped around the story were incredible.
Fantastic, quirky, and artistically brilliant. Then again, I am a sucker for the long take, and this movie was just that.
Amazing movie, different and beautifully done. Great acting, dialogues and photography... loved it!
Watch it. Just watch it. You could ignore what I'm gonna say about the movie, all you need to now is it watch it, NOW. The reasoning for this is that the film tackles so many topics, so many things that are normal to us, and puts them under the spot light to show us how ridiculous and how meaningless they are until we make them worth something. It even talks about how critics are pretentious in-titled assholes. Just please for god sake just watch this movie.
Another case of a movie which is critically acclaimed for it's style and technicalities, but has a plot which is mundane. Good for what it is, yes, but not for my tastes.
Grim and lacking depth, Birdman is not only a bore to sit through, it also lacks the comedic elements that would make these characters shine. The film is beautifully shot and Michael Keaton is pretty decent as Birdman, but the rest of the cast played very one-note characters who almost have no reason to even be there. Certainly one of the most overrated films of the year.
This was the Oscar winning Movie of the Year. I just sort of got into it. I like weirdly little flicks but I was only mildly entertained by the quirky characters. Maybe I just wasn't in the mood but at one point, around the middle, I started playing on my tablet. Edward Norton and Emma Stone were good characters but not very likable. Maybe I just don't get it but Birdman was rather boring.
The way they shot this film is so amazing. Defiantly a must watch film if you consider yourself a film nerd.
This holds up on second viewing ... for the most part. It's great to see Iñárritu break from the pattern of dour, joyless features he's been in. This is the best film he's done since Amores Perros. The style of the film is flashy, but it fits the story he's telling and enhances the performances. I only really have two serious problems with it. The depiction of the critic is really just a cheap shot that feels beneath the rest of the movie. It belongs in a Shyamalan movie, not this one. It should also end about 10 minutes earlier. The ending he has feels like he had no idea how to end the film at all.
A different and difficult film to like
I think this is really overrated and not my cup of tea at all. I can see some people liking it and it is different, but confusing and not great.
original, charming, outstanding cast, billiant photography, super directed, what else u can ask from a movie?
Sorry Boyhood, but this movie got the Oscar it deserved. This movie is one of the best of 2014, and features phenomenal directing, cinematography, writing, and acting especially. Michael Keaton gives a truly Oscar-worthy performance, and everyone else is fantastic as well, notably Edward Norton. This movie, directed to look as if it was one shot, is amazing to watch, and the story beneath is fantastic as well. There are many scenes that leave you speechless, and the in-jokes it makes about Hollywood are amazing. Overall, this movie is a must-watch for movie lovers. 9.5/10
very boring movie. The relentless solo jazz drum riffs throughout the movie gave me a headache and I am a drummer.
Soooo overrated!! Just a Hollywood, common, and popular film.....
It's not an easy film to watch, it's not a happy or a fun film to watch. However it is brilliant, Michael Keaton has always been a much underrated actor the equal of his peers but never given the credit. In Birdman he plays a frustrated actor famous for playing a super hero but desperately wanting to prove his acting skills on the stage. Burdened by many Devils, he battles to bring his show to opening night. Did I understand it all? Not really but you can't take your eyes off the screen.
I know I should have gotten more out of this but all in all I wish I had those two hours back
Great movie visually stunning
Dull and boring movie about a self-pitying actor. No story, no atmosphere, no like-able characters. Fairly predictable too. Is it an artistic flick? No. (At least I hope this is not considered Art.) Is it enjoyable to watch? Maybe if you are in the industry, you could find something in it to relate to. Otherwise - no.
First time I was deeply satisfied with the year's Best Picture. Amazing camerawork, amazing direction, amazing acting, and an amazing, unique story. Nothing in this movie is dull or lacklustre, and it has one of the best ending for a movie ever.This movie was not only funny, but also very deep and meaningful.
Really very odd movie but totally excellent. All the actors are brilliant in it.
Weird, wonderful and utterly thought provoking. This movie rightly deserves all of it's nominations even if it's relying slightly on its actors and one-take cinematography over it's direction and soundtrack.
It might be some depressing philosophical bullshit, but it's also one hell of a ride.
Michael Keaton is a struggling actor trying to make it back into the big time, but finds it tough to shrug off his past and troubles in the present.
At first I hated this movie but as time went on I learned to respect and love this movie for what it is, extremely original concept as well. And the camera work was excellent as well
not sure I got what all the buzz was about...Edward Norton was the only character that seemed to be fully developed
Movie written by actors for actors so they can say look at how great I am. Lots of dialogue with gritty facial expressions- too pretentious for me!
Senseless and baseless
My favorite movie, a unexpected piece of art tha blow on your face every dialogue
This was quite the artsy film but I enjoyed the performances of all the cast. Keaton was outstanding.
I sat down with great anticipation about the movie, I really did! In the end I just decided it was more or less a waste of my time. Not everything was that bad though. I really liked the photography and direction of the movie. Some of the shots were really really nice but overall I was left with a feeling of dizziness from all the weird angles. The storyline was OK but nothing special I would say. The acting from Keaton was exemplary as was the one from Norton and Galifianakis, but they alone could not save a movie that was (a) script less and (b) all over the place during most of the film. I did not appreciate the constant noise from drums and other instruments and I definitely did not like all this constant confusion. I liked the effect with the special powers and they way in which the director handled the taxi scene where you understand that he's just a man after all. I did not care for the mixed up ending as well. From my point of view, I think that what happened after the gun shot, was in his mind for this brief moment before he passed away. He did not shoot his nose from point blank and he did not miraculously lived from that! He can't have. This is a nice finding as well but we could do with a more concrete proof that indeed that's the ending. Having his daughter looking low and then high in the air and seeing him fly or not. No, that's just something I don't care about. I like my movies to end in the end and not go online and search about it, thank you very much. I did not like all the emphasis on the movie critic. She actually pushed him to suicide, doing nothing more in the movie, sitting there and drinking in the same bar, actually having 4-5 lines. What's that about? Is it to blame it on the theater critics in general? Is this a statement? I think not. As for Keaton, he is also a really fragile and strong character at the same time, with no will to live, hanging, barely on his own breath, trying to survive minute by minute. He has depicted really well his character, indeed, but it's the character himself that I did not like. What's he about? He's miserable and pathetic and then a theater critic pushes him over the edge and he just kills himself... Really? In general, all the characters were depicted on a superficial level (someone would expect the opposite them being actors and all) not allowing the viewer to relate or merely to understand their actions and pick sides. Having watched all the other Oscar nominated actors and movies, Birdman was a true disappointment of a movie. The only thing that saves the day is the performance of Keaton, even playing a character not worthy of much.
Bold and immersive. Incredibly impressive direction.
Powerhouse performances from every one as well ad incredible directing make this one of the best films of 2014. The cinematography is amazing with the use of long shots, while the story is smartly engaging and brilliant. The film ends in a ambitious way.
I found it very boring. I didn't care a lick about any of the characters. Keaton and Norton were very good, and their performance was the only reason why I didn't turn it off.
Why isnt this movie about a superhero because it should be.
Through delivering an astounding, career-defining performance, Michael Keaton is able to bring even more life to the already intriguing, darkly funny, original, ambitious, dazzling, biting, poignant, beautiful and deliciously complex film that is Birdman. It's the best picture of 2014, and it confirms Iñárritu as one of the most fearless directors of our time.
Great movie. A masterpiece.
It was good but I wouldn't watch it again.
What can I say? This is what a movie is supposed to be like.
Truly one of the best movies ever made, and the year's best movie. Birdman is a movie with no missing elements. It has great directing, great acting, great plot, positive messages,and touching scenes. It is also thrilling. Do not miss this movie. If you got bored in the first 20 minutes, do not stop it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I gotta give this film all the credit in the world for pure innovation and technical brilliance.  I'm actually surprised that a movie this experimental even got nominated, much less stake out a position as a frontrunner.  The entire movie is one unbroken take, I cannot imagine the level of difficulty in making this film.  Added to that are the brilliant performances all round, and though Michael Keaton shines as the lead, I was probably most impressed with Edward Norton in his supporting role.  This movie is definitely weird and open to interpretation (it has metaphysical elements, without which I think the story would have been better served) and it's beyond meta.  Keaton's character has both massive insecurities and delusions of grandeur, and the film doesn't shy away from pointing out the vapidity of Hollywood and the meaningless of the awards given to its members.   Ironic that a film about a man struggling with the realization that he is unimportant and seeking validation would be showered with so many of the same accolades the character so desperately seeks.  This movie is impeccably made (deserving of a Best Director award) and is unquestionably the most inventive of the nominees, but it's a little too bizarre for its own good.
Very deep. Feel like you could take something different away from it with each viewing.
9/15/15 I saw this about a month ago, but I can tell you that it sucked. It put me to sleep. Nothing was happening, and I could tell very early on that it was going to be a pointless film. Avoid this unless you want to be disappointed. Now I remember my review.... It felt like it was a bunch of scenes thrown together just to give the actors the chance to do some emotional acting. So, there is great acting, but it doesn't mold an interesting story together. Again, most scenes just feel like an excuse to let the actors show their stuff. This is great, but only if you care about the characters. Since there is nothing interesting about the story, I didn't care about the characters.
This was a bizarre movie. A good, but bizarre movie. I can see why this movie was so talked about during the award nominations. The production is just amazing. A lot of the film was show with one take, and the camera just follows the actors through their scenes. From a production standpoint alone this is a pretty amazing movie. The story was kind of weird to me though, and I'm not quite sure how it ended for sure. It's worth a watch though as the cast was great and the production is just amazing.
Curiosa manera de contar una historia un tanto normal. Entretenida
yes Yes YES YEEEEEES YEEEEEEEEES!!!!
Was expecting something else...Thought I would see more about his turmoil between his superhero character and him. But the whole movie was just to gross, profane laced and just plain depressing...ugggh 2.5 hours I will never get back. Keaton's performance was stellar, but just too depressing.
Birdman is Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's best film ever I seen. Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography is unbelievable. Michael Keaton's outstanding performance is brilliant. This movie is really amazing and beautiful. I want to recommend this movie to you.
Horrible totally dark and strange. Don't get it
A bizarre movie and not worth watching.
Was not impressed given that this won Best Picture. It was good, but the hype was not deserving. Like Shakespeare in Love, Hollywood likes movies about the craft of acting and it gives those movies the awards. Acting is very good, story is ok.
Dialogue, dialogue, and acting. Dope ass movie.
Suppose it was OK, but I struggled to care about any of the characters.
A well crafted film, but heavy on the continuous shot gimmick. Michael Keaton gives the performance of his career (and the under appreciated performance by Zach Galifianakis is probably his best too). In fact, the performances of all the actors are so good they seem to be playing themselves, which is also the reflection of a great script, but without the gimmick, one has to wonder if this film would have been half as good.
Pornographic hive of artist lies and lists with bic pen minds they stick in graves like eyes I've seen again and again. BORING. Magical realism to The worm? When my Tesla switches from electric to gas.
Great performances from the entire cast and a strange but interesting story.
Absolutely incredible. Everything about this film is flawless. You become attached to each character because the development is outstanding. Lastly, this film features the best cinematography and editing I've seen in years. Perfect pacing.
Fast, fascinating and FUN. So much fun, more fun than I've had at a movie theater this entire Oscar season. Every performance is a career high. Every shot is perfect (ha ha). Every moment is memorable. Who could possibly expect this from the director of Babel? Not me. Edward Norton as a nightmare method actor brings the house down. Emma Stone showcases a new depth. And Keaton channels...himself. But don't all great actors?
Umm, well, this movie just sucked. I like Michael Keaton, but basically it's a camera following some pretentious, self-absorbed actors who are involved in a Broadway play. It's one of those movies where the characters fire off nonstop, pompus and pretentious, self-important dialogue, fully formed with no hesitation or thought involved. And Edward Norton is the king of pompous and pretentious. It's like the screenwriters are trying to impress us with how cool they are. There's a scene where they forcefully and angrily argue, like it really matters, whether you should say I didn't know the guy in 3 lines or 1 line. And another scene where the main character goes to get fitted for his costume and gets naked in front of some women. And there's big discussion about what he did. Like it really matters. And then the main character flies off the handle in front of the audience and they stop the play. Like it really matters. I suppose if you're an actor then stuff like this would be interesting and pertinent, but for the rest of us it's just gimmicky and self-absorbed and pompous and stupid. And speaking of gimmicky for the sake of being cool and gimmicky....from what I saw the entire film was continuous shot from a single camera moving with the action, no cuts whatsoever. Wow, talk about being deliberately gimmicky. Geez people, it's about a freakin' Broadway play. It's hard to generate some serious drama about a piece of irrelevant fluff like a Broadway play. Who cares?? Another almost unwatchable movie that I turned off about halfway through.
Was excited to see the really high review scoresOver 1hr 15 in now and I'm turning it offGarbage!!!!
This movie was so boring...I do NOT understand how on earth it got such high ratings. What a let down.
Michael Keaton - brilliant. Always has been. Supporting cast - very good. Storyline - very modern and entertaining. This movie contains a lot of the inside of 21st century show business. But it is not completely perfect. Believe it or not - there are some contrived elements - mostly because it seems that the end game is to please the film festivals - which means every film must rank a certain level on the Wes Anderson quirky and weird scale or the Cuaron scale. Still, the movie is worth seeing once - however, without Keaton, it may have fallen flat.
This is a perfect art movie for art fanatics made for the sole purpose of winning an Oscar. To the average viewer it is simply a boring, uninteresting movie. Its not that I only like action movies & blockbusters. I have watched and liked super slow, intense movies with minimal dialogue and action - which have won Oscars - the Pianist for example, which totally deserved the award. This is something else. Yes, I DID notice the 'seemingly seamless' scenes and certain intense spurts of good acting. But apart from that - it was just very average. Many TV series actors act better than some of these people. I'd say this movie managed to impress a very small circle of critics who really matter. The others just followed suit.
This is the most idiotic, boring, incoherent crapfest I have ever seen. Pure garbage
Birman is almost like reading a book full of so much symbolism and themes that it does it just as well in a film. The most notable aspects of the film that supersede it are the acting styles of Keaton and Norton blended with the strange camera motioning.
Decent film I guess, but way too weird and one of the most horribly overrated movies I've ever seen. There is no way in hell that this should have won Best Picture. Literally every single other film that was nominated was better.
With great acting and excellent directing,Birdman is nothing short of amazing.
An amazing movie. The technical difficulties are executed with such ease that one cannot even imagine how vast they were. The cast have a fantastic chemistry, and the satirical nature of the film was outstanding. I wish there were more people pushing boundaries and producing movies like this
You will either like it, or hate it. That's about all I can say, lol.
Intriguing, quixotic, confusing.... Following Riggan (Michael Keaton's character) around on his comeback self-produced play on Broadway, I rode his roller-coaster as it careened wildly through his manic highs and crashing lows. Never a dull moment. I will never again see a show or play, without understanding the angst, anxiety and raw fear that inspires a great performance. This left me amused and bewildered, but never uninvolved.
An unimportant film; the pilot fish film community's vainglorious preoccupation with Iñárritu is wearing thin. Barely watchable.
Though it's a cheat, the infinite one tracking shot was a cleaver cheat that kept me connected to the world and the very well written characters. The themes of relevance and family were relatable and the performances by all involved was amazing. Birdman helped me view films in a new and wonderful light.
I find I have to give Birdman a grudging four stars. On the one hand, I am not a fan of the style of acting, reminiscent of American Hustle (though the actors themselves are fine). The plot was not that great either. On the other hand, Birdman is an interesting and engaging film. I enjoyed the directing and I liked the single shot style, did not find it to be gimmicky. I thought it was definitely a cut above Gravity and a cut below Enter the Void; and that makes it a pretty good film.
Super weird but interesting concept and great acting.
Great story, killer cinematography, amazing performances, and wit for miles. What's not to like?
2014's Oscar winner for Best Picture will come as an enigma to many who watch it. Was this really the best film of 2014? Well, yes and no. Of course, it's always subjective.Birdman walks the line between art and entertainment, fame and celebrity, sanity and madness. A washed-up actor once a household name for playing a big screen superhero, Riggan Thompson's new project is starring in, directing and adapting a broadway play based on one of his favourite novels. A pet project which is costing him in ways which cannot be counted in currency and met with resistance by on-and-off stage arguments with a difficult co-star, a spiteful theatre critic, his own family members and even his own alter ego, a constant reminder that he had it all as the big Hollywood star of a comic book franchise. Confused yet? The story, which draws comparisons with Shakespeare's Macbeth, is as labyrinthine as the set on which it takes place, but what does make Birdman a marvel to behold is the cinematography, lighting, editing and visual effects which make the movie feel as though it were all filmed in one take, with barely any visible cuts and camera movements which flow around the set without skipping a beat (even passing two actors stood in front of a mirror without casting a reflection).Everything about the film is cinematic genius, but simply won't be appreciated by everyone. Like most things comedy, you have to be in on the joke to get it.
Beautiful emotional portrayal of the life of an actor.
Birdman is shot and edited in such a way that it appears to be a single take throughout 90% of the film. It tells the story of Riggan Thompson (Michael Keaton) a former superstar of a superhero franchise known as Birdman. He has since washed up and is out to prove he was more than just a lycra bird suit and big action scenes. To do this he is writing, directing, producing, and starring in a Broadway adaptation of Raymond Carver's What We Talk About When We Talk About Love. The production hits speedbumps along the way to opening night and Riggan has a series of mental speedbumps as well.Things I Liked:Michael Keaton and Edward Norton. These two guys tear it up throughout this movie. There are a lot of great scenes in this movie but there is this one fairly early on where it's just the two of them rehearsing on stage and the moment they let the characters go you suddenly realize that you have gotten drawn in and are glued to the screen. They both deliver monsterous performances and create incredibly interesting and multidimensional characters. Unbelievable.The Cinematography. There is a reason that Emmanuel Lubezki has two cinematography oscars. He's phenomenal at his job. The movie, like I said, is shot to appear as though it is a single take that flows through space and time. The movie has a beautiful look and uses both intense chaos and absolute stillness to the greatest of effects. The movie uses sets that create the cramped backstage atmosphere of the St. James Theatre and really makes you feel like a fly on the wall because there is no wiggle room to move around these sets.The Score. The soundtrack to this movie is absolutely perfect. A combination of over the top classical pieces and freestyle jazz drums. The sweeping score moments are mostly to accompany Riggan's high moments and the times when he is truly feeling on top of the world, the drums are to assist with his inner conflict and the conflict of the show as it falls apart at the seams. The score isn't usually something that stands out to me in movies but this one added so much that it is hard to ignore.Things I Didn't Like:Nothing Really. I was transfixed by this movie the first time I got out of this. I caught numerous moments and subtle things I missed from the first time. The third time I watched it I was over come with excitement. I haven't found a moment I was taken away, a problem, line readings I didn't like, characters I felt were unnecessary. This movie is an experience that drags you along and you can't let go until those credits roll because you WILL miss something if you aren't paying attention.Overall. Overall, Birdman was a reminder of how amazing movies can be. It was a reminder that there are still original things that can come out of Hollywood. It was a reminder that actors who you had written off can come back and astound you multiple times. And for me personally, it's an excuse to indulge all of my interests: theatre, film, superheroes, music, etc. It's an experience. And one I am happy to take part in multiple times over.
Super actuacion de Michael Keaton ... sin palabras.
i thought this movie was awful i don't see why it was rated so high i thought it was lame and stupid
Great movie, great camera movements and those sound of drums... Lovely acting, and... whatever... stop reading this and watch that movie!
Bad bad bad just bad!
Birdman was a wonderful satirical look into the current state of the film industry. It isn't as humorous as the advertisements would have you believe, but then again, life is rarely laugh-out-loud funny. This film is steeped in realism as the subject matter, being that actors are people too and have real problems. Michael Keaton's eccentric performance makes the film that much more believable and you are left wondering by the end of the film whether or not he's sane. There are several moments where the film would make me laugh, but then I would realize that what made me laugh was actually tragic and then I would stop laughing, on a darkly humorous level, this film is comedy genius, but it also features moments of poignancy and mental anguish, not unlike many real-life experiences.
The last 20 minutes honestly almost ruin what could have been an absolute fantastic movie
the one shot aspect was distracting the first watch through. second viewing proved more enjoyable watching a nobody risk everything to be a somebody again.
Birdman is a movie about movies, shot beautifully, and has some groundbreaking performances.
Full of in-jokes, cliches and self indulgence, Birdman is as pretentiously heavy handed as its jazz-drum soundtrack. Few critics have dared to be honest and nail this movie to the wall as the smugly self-important wank-fest that it is. There is an Emperor's New Clothes hype surrounding this film that I can't fathom. Maybe critics are too afraid of being labelled a vitriolic curmudgeon like Lindsay Duncan's character in the movie; a long since defunct pastiche of theatre critics. She is just one of the many clichés and stereotypes which litter this movie: the overpaid, narcissistic actor/director-on-the-edge; the over-burdened, neurotic manager; the brattish, rebellious daughter; the insecure, needy actresses and of course, the genius-but-impossible-to-work-with, method actor. Even the clever in-jokes are over-played, like the casting of two actors embittered by their stints as superheroes to satirically act out their real-life reputations, Keaton famous for playing on-the-edge characters (Beetlejuice, Batman and Dream Team), Norton famous for being notoriously difficult to work with. I found it hard to stomach these actors, both of whom made super-rich by their trade, ironically riffing on the amount earned by RDJ for Iron Man, even as art imitating life, imitating art. We get it! Don't labour the point to absurdity. Hollywood is solely about the money and imaginatively bankrupt. We get it! I am being a bit unfair, the casting and acting does redeem this film, as does the amazing cinematography, but as demonstrated by other actor-indulgent-films, like American Hustle last year, allowing actors to improvise does not necessarily make for realistic, gritty dialogue. It comes across as stilted, unfocused and self indulgent, just like this movie. It won one well deserved Oscar for Best Cinematography. Best Director, okay I can appreciate Alejandro González Iñárritu's vision and his talent at getting such performances from such notoriously difficult actors. Best Film? I don't think so, though not really surprising when looking at the narcissism of the voters, Ooh look, a film all about me. That said, I am deeply appalled that such a hackneyed story, full of clichéd characters spouting unrealistic dialogue, could win Best Original Screenplay when compared to the other nominees. A travesty.
Decent. Got great reviews but I was kinda bored through a large portion of it
It just became my 3rd fav movie all time!
This movie is as close to perfection as any recent movie has come. Oscar-worthy performances all around, a funny and hard-hitting script and an ambitious style that compliments the nature of the film, this is the best best picture winner in a long time.
This movie is definition of art film. This is one of the best movies i ever seen the way it's directed the way it's acted it is just amazing. Cinematography and directing is revolutionary editing was off the charts the movie is just beautiful to watch and after watching it you feel inspired you want to grab a camera and invite bunch of friends and make a movie. Every performance in this movie deserves an oscar. This is the type of movie that makes actors, ACTORS. The main star, the main man is Alejandro González Iñárritu what a filmmaker with this movie he easily proved that he is one of the best directors working today. This movie is pure masterpiece of film
I certify every single compliment you have heard about this movie. This is an instant classic. A must see in Film Classes from now on. This is Iñarritu's equivalent to Orson Wells's Citizen Kane. An excellent and complex layered plot, innovative photography techniques and superb acting of all the cast. A homage to the actor's profession who try to make art in little theathers around the world.
there you go you motherfucker!
-Birdman: Or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), commonly known as Birdman, is a 2014 American black comedy-drama metafilm directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu. It was written by Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris Jr. and Armando Bo. The film stars Michael Keaton with a supporting cast of Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone and Naomi Watts. The story follows Riggan Thomson (Keaton), a faded Hollywood actor famous for his role as superhero Birdman, as he struggles to mount a Broadway adaptation of a short story by Raymond Carver.The film covers a two week period of previews leading to a Broadway opening. The story is filmed as if in a single long take. The script took two years to write, post-production was planned in detail, rehearsals required several weeks. The film was shot in New York City during the spring of 2013 with a budget of $16.5 million jointly financed by Fox Searchlight Pictures, Regency Enterprises and Worldview Entertainment. It premiered the following year in August where it opened the 71st Venice International Film Festival.Birdman had a limited theatrical release in the United States on October 17, 2014, followed by a wide release on November 14, grossing more than $103 million worldwide. The film won the Academy Award for Best Picture, along with the Best Director for Iñárritu, the Best Original Screenplay, and the Best Cinematography from a total of nine nominations, tying it with The Grand Budapest Hotel for being the most nominated film of the Academy's 87th annual awards ceremony. It also won the Outstanding Cast in a Motion Picture at the 21st Screen Actors Guild Awards, as well as Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy for Keaton and Best Screenplay at the 72nd Golden Globe Awards.-Birdman was edited by Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrione, who had both worked with the director before on 21 Grams and Babel.--Critical response:-Birdman received critical acclaim, particularly for Keaton, Norton and Stone's performances; Iñárritu's direction; the screenplay; and Lubezki's cinematography. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a rating of 92% based on 260 reviews, and an average rating of 8.5/10. The site's critical consensus reads, A thrilling leap forward for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, Birdman is an ambitious technical showcase powered by a layered story and outstanding performances from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton. Metacritic gave the film a score of 88 out of 100, based on 49 critics, indicating universal acclaim.
A realistic, flawless and brilliantly acted masterpiece. Easily one of the best films of the year.
I was really looking forward to this considering the buzz that it produced at the awards ceremonies as well as many great reviews but I just didn't see what all the fuss was about. I found it quite boring. I know what the film is trying to set out to do but it just didn't work for me, I didn't find it compelling at all. When I look back over the director's previous movies, maybe he's just not the director for me. The first film I saw of his was Amores Perros which I thought was brilliant. However, since then, 21 Grams, Babel and Biutiful have all been somewhat underwhelming, as was Birdman :o(
A thought-provoking film characterized by the outstanding performances from M. Keaton and E. Norton.
A near perfect film experiment that is equal parts engrossing drama and raucous meta-humor.
Being an actor must be one of the most psychologically tasking professions that man has yet created. You're asked to move from skin to skin, from soul to soul, from psychology to psychology, from paying gig to paying gig, and also to traverse the minefield of box office success. If you're successful, you're asked to do this with breakneck rapidity. It's no wonder some actors succumb to mental breakdowns and unhealthy choices.Michael Keaton understands this better than anyone else. From Night Shift in 1982 to The Dream Team in 1989, he established himself as one of the most likable comedians in the business. Then he was improbably cast in the coveted role of Batman, leading many to regard the news with Really? Mr. Mom? But the movie would become one the highest grossing and most beloved action movies of all time, and the peak of the Keaton's career. After a less-than-stellar sequel in 1992, he walked away and the remainder of his career hasn't ever reached that peak again, until now.There is virtually no way that Keaton could brush off comparisons between his own career and that of the character that he plays in Birdman, a once great box office star of a hit superhero franchise who walked away from the series at its height but never really found that level of success again. As moviegoers, we love connectivity - we love seeing actors parallel their lives on the screen. We love to ask what if? What if Keaton had continued his role as The Caped Crusader under the direction of Joel Schumacher? Would he still be as beloved for the role of Batman if he had continued on?To ask those questions is to wonder if Keaton himself ever considered this. Alas, we shall never know what might have become of the series and that question is what gives a movie like Birdman - or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance, a bit of poignancy.In what may be the comeback role of all time, Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, a once great box office superstar who starred in the blockbuster Birdman series 25 years ago but walked away from the series after three films, effectively giving up the fame and the money that went with it. Now, past 60, Riggan is the prime candidate for the Where Are They Now? files, a washed up actor who feels that he never really reached his potential. Yet, something is pulling him back - he misses the fame and notoriety that went with the role. It doesn't help that he continually hears the sinister, gravelly voice of Birdman in his head reminding him of this at every moment that his brain is idle.The need to redeem himself and restore his career to a degree of respectability is what is causing Riggan to lose his marbles. In a last ditch effort at respectability, he has staked his reputation and all of his money on writing, directing and starring in a flouncy Broadway adaptation of Raymond Carver's What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.The pace of Birdman is breathtaking as we watch the backstage preparation for a play that everyone believes is shaping up to be a disaster. Every conceivable disaster is laying on Riggan's shoulders. His daughter Sam (Emma Stone) is now his personal assistant - and a reminder of his lousy parenting skills. There's the issue that Laura, his leading lady (Andrea Riseborough), may be pregnant with his child. Plus, there's the issue of Mike (Edward Norton), the self-involved leading man who is not only bedding one of the other cast members (Noami Watts), but is known to unexpectedly improvise.What could have been just a boring backstage farce, actually turns out to be one of the most entertaining movies to watch. Director Alejandro González Iñárritu, usually known for dead serious dramas like Babel and 21 Grams takes a lighter touch here, creating a comedy that is funny not is jokes but in situation. We watch Riggan adrift in his own public image, whose most prolific moments have nothing to do with his work, like a video that goes viral after he accidentally locks himself out of his dressing room and ends up in the street in nothing but his underwear.Birdman kicks off as a dizzy backstage farce. Still in previews, Riggan's play is shaping up to be a colossal disaster. He may or may not have gotten his leading lady (Andrea Riseborough) pregnant, his estranged daughter (Emma Stone) has signed on as his personal assistant and is a constant reminder of what a bad father he was, and his newest cast member (an excellent Edward Norton) is a self-serious loose cannon who's sleeping with his insecure costar (Naomi Watts). Iñárritu, the Mexican director of puzzle-piece melodramas such as Babel and 21 Grams, has a lighter, looser tone here, taking aim at the needy egos of theater folk and the craven carpetbagger mentality of Broadway today, where movie stars without stage training are leveraged to sell tickets. Goosing the satire to life is daredevil cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (Children of Men), whose camera bobs and weaves amid the chaos in what looks like one long, breathless Steadicam shot.As opening night approaches and the pressure on Riggan mounts, the taunting voice in his head grows louder until it's unclear what's real and what's imaginary. The film breaks with reality too, jackknifing into a trippy detour that audiences will either go with or not. For me, there was never any question. I was so all-in on Keaton's vanity-free, go-for-broke metamorphosis I would have followed him, or the movie, anywhere. Which is pretty much where it asks you to go. Birdman is a scalpel-sharp dissection of Hollywood, Broadway, and fame in the 21st century. But more than that, it's a testament to Keaton's enduring charisma and power as an actor. He soars.
All around a very good movie worth watching. While not my favorite film of 2014, I was still very impressed and enjoyed the cinematography immensely.8.5 out of 10 VERY GOOD
Amazing work by amazing performers. Technically enthralling. Entertaining and fulfilling examination of persona and perspective. As an added bonus, this film is also genuine, charming, and funny.
It´s bold, it´s creative and it´s the best movie of the year!
Technically it may be good but I only like Edward Norton and Zach Galifianakis' performance. And yeah it's easy to be a critic.
Amazing performances.
Great movie...great cast...and fantastic camera work!!!
so boring and dull, very slow.
Predictable, pretentious and biased. This movie was made to appeal to the Oscar committee. Making the movie seem like one continuous shot is neat and mostly seamless, but the technic and great acting doesn't do it to save this movie that could have been better told as a short film.
Very simple, don't.... You will never get that time back.
A year light on epics produces this most unusual Best Picture winner. I think it is important for a movie outside of the mold to make an impression so I am happy with this very quirky film getting the nod. It is the best behind the scenes look at a production since Vanya on 42nd Street centred on an underappreciated great actor.
Great acting. Great directing. An odd and dark comedy that rattles the brain.
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu arrives with his latest film, which partly acts as a satire on the current state that films are in with big, loud box office projects from various directors, while bringing it home to a time of more character driven, smaller films.This film focuses on a washed up actor, Riggan Thomson, who is well known for playing the superhero Birdman in several films. He plans on restarting his career by mounting the play What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, written by Raymond Carver. He has not only written it, but is also directing and starring in it. After a light fixture falls during rehearsal onto one of the co-stars, Riggan is forced to bring in method actor Mike Shiner to replace the actor, while Shiner attempts to steal the spotlight from Riggan at times.The film is a ground breaking achievement, which perfectly pokes fun at the current state of Hollywood and how films are being approached as big, loud box office films.The cast is terrific, in particular Michael Keaton. Keaton brings a real sense of disaster to the role of Riggan, who is at his breaking point, attempting to get the play on Broadway successfully, but also trying to rejuvenate his career. Like his character, Keaton is also well-known for depicting a superhero on screen: Batman, in the two Tim Burton directed films, Batman and Batman Returns. This further allows Keaton to be relatable to the character, while it also seems to help him bring a sense of realism at times to his role. Emma Stone does a great job as Riggan's daughter, a recovering drug addict who takes on the role of assistant on her father's play. Stone is fantastic, working well with Keaton and Edward Norton in several scenes. Naomi Watts and Andrea Riseborough are also perfect as actresses appearing in the play, as is Amy Ryan as Riggan's former wife. Lindsay Duncan puts forth a cold performance as an antagonistic theatre critic, while Zach Galifianakis puts forth a break out performance as Riggan's lawyer, in his first dramatic performance. The other real standout in the film, next to Keaton, is Edward Norton, who plays the volatile method actor Mike Shiner. Norton is outstanding, going to the limit, at times stealing scenes and even in a few putting forth a comedic tone, such as in a notable scene where he and Naomi Watts emerge from a bed, Norton with a large erection, which is not only unexpected, but also comical. The character is partly similar to Norton, who like Norton, is difficult to work with, even going to extremes to get his performance right. Like with Keaton, this helps Norton brings a sense of realism and grit to his performance.As usual Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography is flawless, very beautiful. Here, the entire film is presented as one long take, which required up to fifteen to twenty minutes of a scene to be filmed in one take. While the film wasn't shot as one long take, the shooting structure, constant rehearsing and editing techniques help it appear like a single long take, which is not only flawless, but also supports the film. Throughout the entire film, it never feels like a gimmick, it really does support it, while it is also something to be admired.The drum score, by Antonio Sanchez, is also remarkable, at times unsettling, but also at times calm, bring a great sense of jazz to the entire film. The score supports many of the characters, their actions and the plot.The end result is a film that perfectly honors character driven, small films, while also honoring at times the golden days of filmmaking. It also acts as a wonderful, satirical thesis on the matter that most of these big, dull, senseless, loud box office films have taken over audiences (for example those by Michael Bay) and have started to overshadow the more well thought out, character driven films that don't always need to rely on senseless, loud action with no clear plot in mind.When the film ends, you feel like you have seen not only a great film, but a film by a true genius.
This was a real creative character study with strong performances. The mechanics of the production were original and the filming was very swift. Overall, it's a forcible story with great dialogue, highly recommend.
Eh... didn't think it was all that great :(
This movie sucked balls
Ok... I know this was highly acclaimed. But I just didn't get it. I was left thinking... Wtf? I couldn't get behind the odd improvised jazz drumming soundtrack. Clearly, I'm not sophisticated enough to appreciate this higher form of cinematic art.
A cinematic triumph in every facet of filmmaking!!! The extra-long wait for this film to make it Down Under has paid off in spades for me. This is one of those dazzling insider's film that's certainly not for everyone -- I loved every second of it! The single-shot gimmick has been done before -- probably, most notably in Russian Ark -- however, the illusion of Lubezki's single-shot cinematography is a thing of wonder. The directorial control of each scene is awesome! To paraphrase a bit of hyperbolic prose from film critic Rex Reed -- who, by the way, HATED this film! -- if Innaritu doesn't win the director's Oscar, there is no God...! By far and away this is the best ensemble cast of the year. WOW, everyone deserves some kind of award!!! There will be no justice if Birdman's nest isn't full of golden eggs at the end of Oscar's season.... Truly, the most astoundingly wondrous triumph of the year...! SEE IT, if you give a damn about films that matter...! :D
Birdman has all the technical achievements you should expect on a great movie, and the acting is incredible. But despite that, I thought it was a drag.
Definitely one of the best Oscar winners in years. Solid Performances from everyone all around. Every character gets their time and nothing feels rushed or stuffed together. The writing in this movie is great and is so unorthodox and original in its performance. I love it
Birdman soars in its strong performances and its clever one-shot technique that is more than just a mere gimmick.
Absolute rubbish. One of the worst endings to a movie that I've ever seen. Conclusive proof that the Academy Awards are rigged.
Of note in this dark dramatized tale of a fictitious actor's aging career are the dynamic scenes between Norton and Keaton. Whenever they grace the stage (and the screen) we find evidence of two Hollywood veterans upping their game. Particularly in the case of Keaton, this is a return to form that sets up his best film in a while. There is more than a bit of tongue in cheek that is hard not to assume in much of the films portrayal of Keaton. As the character of Riggan, he plays an actor who is best known for playing a famed superhero (Birdman), but as he ages he finds himself struggling to move past this persona and to give himself to project that could define his legacy as a bonafide actor. In this we are brought face to face with some of the demons from his past, including failures as a father, a fading career, obsessive compulsions, and a struggling rehabilitation. It is this struggle for identity, an exercise of self exploration and the importance of our accomplishments in such a wide and vast world as ours (as an actor, a father, a human being) that forms the heart of the film. The film takes makes some creative choices that play with our perception, including the illusion of being filmed in one continuous shot, and some understated effects that allow us to play along with the voices in his head (including an opening sequence where Keaton is levitating in mid air and moving objects at will). It is meant to have the viewer operating on a number of different levels as we connect with the reality of the character's circumstance, moving from the broken mind of Keaton to the supporting characters around him, and then ultimately as the audience. It's a neat trick in terms of the directing choices, and although it does get a bit odd in places, the creativity adds to the allure of the story. The story itself is fused with a bit of shakespearean undertones, fluxuating between a tragedy and a comedy that fuses with some modern realism and fantastical elements. In this sense it is hard to pin down. It is unique in many ways, although also familiar. Given that much of the film takes place on the stage (the avenue of choice for Keaton's character to revitalize his career), the film also retains something of that stage presence on screen. It moves us from moments that remind us we are watching a film, to sequences that feel like a dramatized stage production. Again, this provides a unique viewing experience, even as we are forced to bring our head around to the style itself. The relationships move and flow at different paces as they intersect with Riggan's world, one in which his failures as a father meet up with his failures as a husband and lover, actor and stage manager. They all reveal the sheer amount of weight that he carries on his shoulders, while also bringing importance to the supporting characters themselves. Of note as well is the perfect casting for Emma Stone as Keaton's daughter, and a very restrained performance by Zach G.. All around the supporting cast is very good.
Not quite understand the movie all about
Definitely dark, sometimes funny, often times odd. I did appreciate the art of the film and the strong acting brought by a great cast. Michael Keaton did a very believable job as a former movie star trying to reinvent himself on Broadway and suffering from a severe identity crisis as a result.The single take  filming style was also interesting but led me to feeling trapped following characters around after a while. It was a good movie, it had amazing acting and a twisted but interesting storyline but no rewatchability, for me at least.
Self-pity masquerade like genius or the Unexpected Bummer of a Crybaby Filmmaker.
Bizarre, yet innovative, Birdman has terrific acting, camera work, editing, score and special effects. I would however, compare it to Black Swan, in that both have eerily similar plot points. Still worth seeking out on the big screen.
Solid but in no way the Best Picture of 2014
Best Director? Yes. Best Cinematography? Absolutely. Best Picture? No way!
Hated! Didn't even finish too weird and scattered for me
Birdman is incredibly addicting, and packs a punch in suspense!
Bestest and favoritest movie ever
Superb avant-garde cinematography and exclusively percussion soundtrack. Wonderful performances. Keaton is superb. Highly recommended.
A visual, artistic, acting and cinematography masterpiece!!!still don't really know what it was about in the end( or rather what the ending was about).  such hyperrealism infused with surrealism, quite qenius..
This movie is entertaining and worth viewing But don't expect it to be the best movie you will see this year.
What to say about Birdman......The Acting in this movie is just on a different level the most movies could hope to even be, i mean of the last 10 or so years i would probably put Birdman and Whiplash in the 10 for acting. Edward Norton is my stand out in Birdman hes amazing I forgot he had this in him it's been a while since fight club but he showed his true power in this movie. not that hes ever really done poorly but this was just something special.Emma Stone and Oscars will be something you start to hear a lot together in the future, maybe even the near future she showed off her skill in this movie just with her facial expressions alone.Michael Keaton gives a career best performance as well showing some range i never knew he had. Throw in a great supporting cast with great performances from Zach Galifianakis, Naomi Watts and Andrea Riseborough, and you have one of the best movies maybe of all time if not.. then surely of 2014. And its not that i think that the plot and story line are even that great, i mean they're really good but its basically a midlife crisis story about a recovering celebrity, that happens to have a great script due to some fantastic writing that meshed the comedy and drama so well. Capped off with some of the most beautiful directing and cinematography i have ever seen in my life, the whole one shot style that just follows everyone around was amazing. This movie is a must watch for any Cinephile Movie Enthusiast 8 / 10.
A technical masterpiece that studies the current state of film, celebrity, media and so much more all whIle being the threshold for an immersive layered story and an overflowing handful of award worthy performances.
I love this movie! They way it was shot the music and the performances were all exceptional. Edward Norton and Michael Keaton were both outstanding. My personal favorite of 2014. After repeat viewings I also find the film to be a deep and thought provoking film.
WTF were the people at the academy thinking? I should sue them to get my two hours back!
Birdman is quite a strange movie, but it is also well-written and contains phenomenal performances from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton. However, the greatest thing about Birdman is the technical achievement and the ambitious, but amazing cinematography.
There is a lot to like about this film. Many of the performances are excellent, among them Michael Keaton and Emma Stone. The historic and worn St. James is a character unto itself. The camera work is perfectly-suited to the gritty story, and is often overbearing, like the actors and dialog. Unfortunately, the script often fails. The plot and dialog struck me as absurd - as if the actors are always on stage. But perhaps that is the point? Is this a slap at the ego of the typical actor? I don't know, but I do know I found myself thinking it was a bit much at times. In particular the character and acting of Edward Norton. There are sequences in the story that are absurd, in direct contrast to the gritty realism of the rest of the film. The bottom line is, I am really not sure whether or not I liked this film. It is worth watching, but may leave you conflicted.
The camera work was incredible! Other than the rock-star cast, the movie (plot, writing, etc) left a lot to be desired.
This was dreadful. Oh my god did this movie suck
Birdman it is a film with many memorable scenes and dialogues. Just to cite one when the ferocious critic Tabitha Dickinson said to Thomson You are not an actor, you are a celebrity. This black, maybe existentialist, comedy is a live dissection of an actor and his ego, the one who had the (easy) fame with a superhero character, but now want to show first himself and then to others that he is capable of do a serious theater play. Keaton and Norton outstanding. The drums music great too.
This movie was excellent! From the characters, to the use of long takes nda clever transitioning, the stage style performance, the rich cognitive narrative to the amazing ending. Good Show Birdman!
Wow, I seem to like movies the critics don't and vice versa. I didn't like this movie at all.
It's a work of art. Amazing how it's shot continuously.
Just finished watching #Birdman.... This was not my typical kind of movie. I really enjoyed its artsy nature and intensity. Seeing the theater from the backstage perspective gave the movie a very mysterious and dark feel that lived up to the movies ending. I could completely see this movie standing the test of time, maybe even becoming a cult favorite of sorts. Anyway if you're looking for something different this is a must see.
There's so much to admire in this dark fable, from the brilliant acting of Keaton and the rest of the cast, to the mesmerizing long shots -- a dazzling display of cinematic choreography. Those are what made the film worth watching, but ultimately I'm just not a big fan of dark, surrealistic tragedies; and even the occasional humorous, playful touches couldn't break through how unlikeable (and self-absorbed) almost all of the characters were. A cautionary tale about the dangers of life as an actor, perhaps?
Technically dazzling with massive acting chops on show. Impressive and fun.
The best thing about this movie is getting the opportunity to watch Michael Keaton and the rest of the strong cast show their acting chops. The way it was structured as if only shot in long sequences was also unique and interesting to watch. This might be an unpopular opinion, but I found the ending to be a little bit silly and it took away from the rest of the movie for me.
This is a movie that has great potential with amazing long shots, great acting, even great dialogue. But, it is hindered by the fact that it doesn't know where it's going, it gets lost in its own perceived genius, to an ending that may make sense to the filmmakers, but means nothing to a general audience. It was one of the longest movies that I have watched, as it just seemed to keep going, way past the point when it felt relevant. All in all, I don't recommend it. It's an Oscar bait film, through and through. People really liked this movie. I wish I could see what they are seeing, but all I see is a mess of wasted possibilities and a wasted cast.
I can't explain it. It's genius.
the best film I've seen in a long while, what I'd call a proper film
Ugh ! This was really bad . I can't see why this was such a highly acclaimed movie. It was slow and tedious to watch. The only thing I can say is as bad as this film was , I expected worse . So here's 2 out of 5 stars. An overall YUCK !
not funny in the least. very disappointing.
Michael Keaton brings his on screen character to life in this film. An odd but delightful drama/comedy.
This movie is boring not best filmNod worthy by a long shot... Ton of praise and for what? Well it is exactly the boring movies that the academy loves to death. SMH
It was good, but definitely did not deserve to win best picture at the 2015 Oscars
An intriguing and artistic insight into the inner working of a washed up actor, and his attempt to become relevant again by the means of a Broadway production. One thing that is a unique addition to cinematography styles in film, is the seemingly one-take shot approach during the entire film, which I can only assume was the idea of exceptionally genius Alejandro Gonzales. Edward Norton was undoubtedly hilarious, and quite obviously had a lot of fun with the role of a stage diva. However, the two big acting highlights were Emma Stone and Michael Keaton, a father and daughter duo with impeccable chemistry and great lines to match. I also thoroughly enjoyed the purely drum based score. However, the movie was a tiny bit long, and there were a few times were it could have harmlessly ended the movie there, but it kept on going. I also can't say I'm a big fan of interpretive endings, but that's just me. Despite it's abundant and vague metaphors, Birdman is pretty light entertainment, and both produced comedy and drama in a way that is rare to find in movies these days. An intriguing and artistically refined drama.
Fantastic acting, but the single shot doesn't leave much time for breaks in the action. Kind of a weird movie, not sure I'd want to watch it again despite the performances from Keaton, Norton, and Stone.
El arte versus el éxito, todo en función del ego humano. Así resumo este excepcional film, que critica con humor negro la moda blockbuster, o como se pone en palabras de González Iñárritu, el genocidio cultural. ¿Exageración? Probablemente. Pero el arte es subjetivo, así que toda tesis planteada es válida. (Como comentario personal, hacer la narración en una sola toma ha sido un experimento interesante, no necesariamente plausible).
Great movie but not the best my Oscar goes to Whiplash. Emma and Edward are marvelous I want to see more of them
Really? This movie won an Academy award for best picture? It was totally a stupid movie. Again I typically fall asleep watching crappy movies.
Lots of great things about this movie... Amazing acting, interesting story, unique style.... But there was something about this movie I just didn't like. It's not a typical movie at all, nothing at all what I was expecting.... I can't say I would recommend this to the average film goer.
A long dark night of the soul, thrillingly directed, acted, photographed and scripted - and anchored by a superlative central performance by Michael Keaton as a man visibly cracking up as he tries to rescue his career with a self-penned adaptation of a Raymond Carver story on Broadway. Shot cleverly in an apparent single steadicam take, but actually taking place over several days, this extraordinary movie has brilliant supporting performances from Emma Stone, Ed Norton and Zach Galifianakis. Any performer will recognise these people.
Bewildering, and I'm sure there's some deeper message and / or metaphor I'm not getting ... but I must say, the artistic direction here is simply incredible. Those tracking shots, that cinematography, hell, even the edits ... hnnng. So. Smooth.
This movie was not the least bit entertaining. Some movies you can watch over and over again, but this is not one of them.
Good filming and good performances
Birdman is a film destined to become a classic. It's an amazing movie that succeeds on just about everything. This film has a fantastic cast, I mean really fantastic, Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis, Naomi Watts and Lindsay Duncan. Every one is amazing, Keaton especially is amazing as Riggan Thomas, it's the best peformance of his career and he definitely deserved his nomination and maybe he even deserved win, I can't wait to see what he does next. Edward Norton is amazing in this movie he's really funny and annoying at the same time, Norton is apparently very hard to work with and this film does a parody of that. Emma Stone is also fantastic, she has a fantastic monologue and gives one of the best peformances of her career. Galifianakis is also fantastic and it's a very different peformance for him. The film is also amazingly directed Alejandro G Inarittu directed this film so well and he 100% deserved his Oscar I can't wait to see his new film the Renevant. This film also has fantastic cinematography, the movie is meant to look like it was shot in one take so you without good cinematography this film would have fallen apart. The cinematography is some of the best I have ever seen it's amazing. The score for this film is also very amazing it's this drum solo that plays whenever there's an intense scene, it's almost like a character itself. It's so simple and so affective. There's also a great piece of music that plays when Riggan imagines himself flying. The Birdman character is also great, we hear him talking in Riggan's head and then see him also a few times and he is great and also does have a lot to say about making a comeback. This film is also really funny, it's not constant laugh out loud every second funny but there are some really funny bits which come from the amazing writing which is so brilliant. The writing is so good all the lines feel natural and the monologues are great. There is this really brilliant scene, it's probably my favourite part of the film where Riggan just slams into this critic who is going to give his show a bad review because she doesn't like him. It's fantastically written and a brilliant scene. This film is just so brilliant it's really hard to describe. If I had any problems it's that some scenes do go on a bit. Also I would have loved to see more of the actual play as those were some of the best scenes. However Birdman is an amazing film. It deserved it's best picture win and is destined to become a classic. This film does live up to they hype and it's great. It's one of the best movies of 2015. A
Probably my favorite film of 2014. It completely deserved every award it won.
Boring. Drumroll was obnoxious, kept making it seem like something was going to happen but nothing ever did.
I can definitely see why this won Best Picture as I've truly never seen anything like it before. The frenetic energy, the constant shots following us from one character to another, and the overall gonzo vibe of the movie is truly unique and amazing. Michael Keaton should have won Best Actor as I've always respected his work. Plus the parallels with his real career and Batman and everything are so spot-on it's uncanny. Perfectly cast movie. It's just not a movie I think I'd watch a bunch of times hence the 4 stars vs. 5.
From the camera work to the 3 layer performance that is Keaton to Norton's riff on serious actors such as himself to the set and costume design, the film is great.
I feel completely blown away! This movie is unlike anything I've seen. 95% of the film is presented with the illusion of being one single continuous shot and it flows at a brisk immersive pace. The behind the scene New York Broadway setting is very cool. Every performance from every actor is top tier. This also might be the best movie about show business that I've seen. The pop culture/entertainment industry satire is very well done and made very relevant by today's comic book blockbuster craze. It is also an emotional roller-coaster; sorrow, anger, optimism, joy, amusement, fear; it's all here and the fact that it's Michael Keaton makes the entire story endearing and very meta. This and X-Men are the two best movies I've seen this year.
The flow of the story here is greatly helped by the vibrant soundtrack Antonio Sanchez put together on the drum and great acting on Keaton's part ties this hybrid of a drama and comedy very well. Even more so interesting is the Mise en abyme of a movie plot revolving around actors.
Let's get the obvious out of the way. Yes, the cinematography is ASTOUNDING. Yes, the acting is truly superb. But if you neglect those elements for just a split second, you begin to unravel the context of the story which is absolutely brilliant. Don't think about what's on the surface. Yes, it's a tale about an actor becoming relevant again who was once a blockbuster superhero on-screen. Kind of funny that it's Michael Keaton. But that's what blinds most people from seeing all the symbolism caked into it's structure. There's more going on and more hidden meaning to this tale. It's paced and told in such a marvelous fashion. Hell, it's as close as you can get to doing an on-screen broadway way. And makes me happy that such a film claimed title to best picture
Although this film is slow at first, it soon finds a steady pace. Most iconic and distinctive form of directing since Under The Skin (directed by Jonathon Glazer). When you hear about Emma Stone's character, you are a little wondrous to whether she can take on such a challenge but the outcome is monumental. The imagery this film creates, is unlike anything seen before. (Sounds cringe, but really is phenomenal). Alejandro González Iñárritu has a completely new style of directing, noticeable from the first scene. Birdman digs at the surface to give a sour taste of the 'real' Broadway. The music score is compelling, although the drums were repetitive. It seems the director wanted to give a drummer a chance and let his work be in a film, but you roll your eyes when you hear drums after the first half hour. I thought that Naomi Watts was good for Lesley but I thought if the director can change the way we look at Emma Stone, could Christina Applegate have played that roll? For the roll of (Riggan's ex-wife, Samantha's mum) I honestly think Allison Janney or Julianne Moore would've contributed far more than Amy Ryan. To end on a lighter note, the ending is great. It allows you to procrastinate on the whole film and just wonder and those people (like me) that quite often want an answer at the end of a film, won't get one but won't be unsatisfied.
Enjoyed everyone in this.
Complex like a Kubrick film, and with a technical prowess never seen before.
Can't say I totally got it. It was pretty weird & interesting at the same time. Norton was good as always. Not something I'd watch again.
Yes, it is a really impressive movie thanks to its actors' performances and to its witty dialogues... Here is a guide for whom needs an acting course
Camerawork is impressive. Story is a bit hard to follow, but still interesting. It has a few jokes here and there.
Just perfect. Perfomances were spotless and what a fantastic direction
Great dialogue. And - drums. That is all. And Edward Norton. Gppd dialogue, good drumming and Edward Norton. Seriously? You need more?
this movie chilled me to the bone .-.
Liked it a lot but was kind of let down by some missing elements and the ending.
Finally decided to watch it..Superb. I mean..it's not something I'll ever watch again but def solid. I think Adam Carolla said it perfect- best movie that I'll never watch again. Maybe not an exact quote but I get it- a great film, great acting, super interesting, well shot etc, but I won't see it twice. Recommend.
Does nothing less than redefining the dark comedy genre forever. A genius film in every sense of the word
I could watch that camera work 3299454 times.
Confusing love for admiration.
The movie's core substance can be summed up in 2 words: Hollywood Narcism. I think that is why it won the Oscar over Boyhood.
Strange, unusual and wonderful.
This is simply one of the best movies I've ever seen. If you haven't seen it, just do it. Not just for the editing and directing you've probably heard about, but for every part of this movie. The dumb puns, the satire, the soundtrack, everything about this movie is awesome.
This is a movie all actors can relate to.
I honestly do not know how to describe this movie. Almost nothing happens. It's an overly long film that goes from comedy to superhero to drama to thriller at the drop of a hat, and is far too artsy to really know what it's on about. The acting and directing are spot on, that of Keaton in a brilliant starring role and the understated Zach Galifianakis as well were excellent, and Alejandro González Iñárritu's direction was well worthy of its Oscar, but as a whole the film, in my opinion, wasn't as good as most of the other Best Picture nominees, and definitley didn't deserve to win over powerhouses like Whiplash and the Grand Budapest Hotel.
Interesting on a structurally filmic level, but utterly catatonic/ boring.
how the hell did this garbage win an oscar? why did they make the non-play portions sound as fake as plays do?
On Oscars night 2014, there was a hullabaloo about Birdman winning best picture. I cheered, without having seen the movie, because it felt like the right pick, what with the renewal of Michael Keaton, a Spanish director Innaritu, it felt like the right socially conscious pick. Plus the commercials made the film seem really bad@ss, so I couldn't see how it could possibly be bad. FFWD a year or more and I have finally watched this movie. It started off well enough with some interesting camera movements and a disturbed Michael Keaton floating in the air. How could it fail? The problem for me was the ending. I kept waiting for that payoff, about what Birdman symbolically was and how this story was important for me to watch. It's hard to underestimate the importance of a good ending, it ties everything together and makes the perfect symbol for the audience to understand. What is the moral of the story? And with Birdman, that moral was seemingly nil. I have long grown unaccepting of Hollywood's pale use of suicide as a trope for a main character to feel any kind of sorrow. I don't know what has happened with Hollywood that characters now have to give up in order for us empathize with them. There is no spirit of the undying, just 'moop, I give up'. Very short, curt and to the point, I guess.But why? Suicide should only be used as the ultimate expression of frustration. But with movies like The Artist and Birdman, we make extreme light of this act in a cartoony, funny sort of way--and it doesn't need that, it doesn't allow that. No one laughed the day comedy died, the day Robin Williams left us. Suicide is something completely ununderstandable, and it will stay that way. A movie trying to explain it in such pale terms should be looked down upon. I'm afraid Hollywood is guilty of not caring enough. They selected this movie probably because they felt it looked nice, even if its narrative makes little sense, and a lot of the acting performances are utterly wasted. Birdman was a callous oscars win, it showed that rich people have about as much care in them as porcelain dolls.
Besides the fact that this was shot to look like it was all done in one take, Birdman showcases its wide range of actors and actresses as they take flight in directions they probably haven't flown before.
Amazing. Simply amazing.
No shock that movie snobs overrated this one. It's like a lesser Charlie Kaufman flick.
thriller and tense drama yet a black comedy, deep and brilliant it's one of the best movies in the last decade, It mesmerized me like there's no tomorrow, I couldn't blink, who thought that Michael Keaton can actually act or still in the game, he provided a legendary performance he shouldn't lose the oscar, Edward Norton's performance was also amazing and the whole cast as well, moreover I can't speak enough about the ending . chapeau bas, I salute the director for his hard work and effort to make this piece of art movie.
08//09/15-HBO GoThe struggle the man is going thru is identifiable. The super human ability he has throughout the movie I feel are his dilutions of grandeur. His daughter gave a speech that brought him down to a reality that most of us take for granted, but he couldn't handle. The directors also touched on how movie goers gravitate to action packed movies and aren't into the articulated films that write to the soul. Worth seeing.
2015's best picture didn't generate much in box office returns, but it did create a lot of buzz among indie film fans. At the center of Alejandro González Iñárritu's 'Birdman: Or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)' is a conflicted man - a former leading actor named Riggan who has fallen from grace and turns to directing and starring in an obscure show on Broadway in an attempt to make himself relevant again. Michael Keaton delivers a standout performance, as he's beyond believable in a semi-psychotic role and really digs down deep to bring the crazy and translate it in a way to make the audience feel a sliver of sympathy for the character formerly known as Birdman.One of 'Birdman's strengths is the craftsmanship that went into the camerawork. There are a number of scenes in the film that are shot in one take, with a single camera. This is an impressive technique no matter what, but it adds to the zaniness that transpires onscreen. There's also plenty of creative editing that is used throughout, and the special effects that correspond with Riggan's hallucinations.While the concept and execution are really cool on the surface, 'Birdman' is not without its flaws. For one, some of the character backstories are sacrificed for cheap dialogue. True, there are some interesting relationships explored, like the one between the daughter of the Birdman (Emma Stone) and a slightly more famous actor who is brought in last-minute to help the play survive previews (Edward Norton), but these seem to muddy the water even further and do not help much. Still, there are characters who are included only for the sake of making Riggan out to be batty, including a smug, prickly 'New York Times' reviewer named Tabitha who helps bring out the true frustration within Riggan. Zach Galifianakis surprisingly plays one of the most sane characters in the entire film.'Birdman' definitely has its fair share of fans, but it's a little too narrowly focused to have major appeal, even with its Academy Award victory.
This is an amazing movie. Technically, it is filmed to appear as though it was one, continuous cut. Truthfully, the cuts are artfully hidden, but no matter. The effect is dazzing. The score is mostly, though not entirely, done on a single drum kit. It appears to be completely non-diagetic, but once in a while they show the drummer, messing with the audience's ideas about what is real in the film and what is not. The acting is fabulous. The story and characters are memorable and very, very interesting. A hint of the paranormal, with questions about how real it is, rounds out this outstanding film. Highly recommended.
Great film. My head was spinning when I left the theater. Enjoyed that it was so different from the norm
I don't understand how this movie got good ratings. It was stupid & confusing. All about a self centered man who is afraid of being forgotten.
Interesting and ultimately somewhat engaging, but also not really my style.
We know what we are, but know not what we may be. -- William Shakespeare
Hilary real enjoyed it but I found it boring
Extremely well acted and directed. The continuous shot style makes it worth the watch alone. A lot more effort went in to this movie than most.
fantastic - even if for only the logistics of the long takes used in the film.
Original, masterfully shot, and amazing performances from Ed Norton and star Michael Keaton.
Man....Michael Keaton is one of my all-time favorite actors and I really rooted for his comeback but I just couldn't find anything to latch onto in this film. Found it more showy on a technical level than it being emotionally engaging.
As weird as it is, Birdman is a new kind of movie, I'm sure this will be a classic in a couple of years
I am always skeptical of the movies that win the major awards. They are usually made for the so called pro critics and for other actors while the general public is left wondering what all the hype is about. Birdman is no different, although it is very unique it is a boring, slow trek through the main characters preparation for putting on a play. The acting is good, although it is not a stretch or challenge for the actors featured as they all portray someone similar to themselves. The very cool part is that the whole film was shot with very minimal cuts. meaning some scenes last 20 minutes without cutting away or switching cameras. That keeps it flowing but also is so different that at times makes it a negative. The plot seemed very straight forward but at times it got really weird with super-powers and flying and it just seemed out of place in the otherwise normal film. This isn't a very funny movie, or exciting one, so unless your a huge Keaton fan or usually love the award winning films, skip over this one and re-watch Batman, Spiderman, or The Hulk for your entertainment.
Amazing performances all around. This was a great watch and had some really interesting characters.
This film seems to have everything, from well acted, well developed characters to biting commentary on the state of filmmaking to stunning cinematography while on top of all that being hilariously self-referential in its casting choices. Keaton and Riggan both used to play superheroes but were largely forgotten afterwards. Norton and Shiner both are notorious for trying to take over the directing of the scenes they are in. All in all, well deserving of the Academy Award for Best Picture that it won.
My Favorite Movie of 2014, Genius
Whatever is so amazing about this film... I think you have to be sipping a long black to get it.
A total waste of money. The most boring movie I've ever seen!
if i could give it a negative 5 or even 10, i would.
WTF did I just watch?
Michael Keaton's performance is marvelous because it's something I never saw him do before,Edward Norton's performance as a broadway actor named Mike Shiner who turns out to be an insane, sarcastic,annoying,bossy asshole is terrific and thing is anyone could've taken this role and make it sound ridiculous but not Norton,and Zach Galifianakis is great as well.This was brilliantly written because it poetically tells the facts about the world we live in(except about the part where Edward Norton says super hero movies are a Cultural Genocide,even though it wasn't in those words but I know that is what director Alejandro Inarritu really thinks ).I felt like watching an actual play.I felt mislead because I was lead to believe that this was focusing more on the main characters inner conflict with his ego and his family issues and his play would get mixed in but no what happened was it focused more on the main character dealing with his play while keeping his actors in place and yes he still dealt with family issues that were hard to resolve but his ego didn't make a very long appearance and in the last half of the movie it gets carried away with it's quirky and artistic style that it seems as if it forgot about the message it was trying send to it's audience.
Kept waiting and waiting but this movie just drags.
Good movie.... there's no actual superhero in this movie except maybe the cameraman who's impervious to getting dizzy. Michael Keaton is the only person who could have played this part.... After DC scraps these new superheros for a whole new set of reboots they should bring back The Real Batman!
The performances from Norton and Keaton were superb and the cinematography was unprecedented; however, this bleak, drawn-out story had trouble holding my attention and lacked overall best picture material.
Didn't enjoy the first half but the ending pushed the envelope of what movies are, and then itself became that movie. Which in itself is ironic.
a bit confused by the ending....but i guess I wasn't the only one...
Really weird movie. A little bit too weird for me
To be honest, Birdman didn't register with me like it seemed to have with practically everyone else. Yes, there are two exceptional performances and there are some technically impressive shots, but I found this film to be more of a chore than anything. Birdman follows a washed up Hollywood actor who is preparing to make is debut on stage. For starters, Michael Keaton and Emma Stone are fantastic, with Keaton being the absolute best that he's been in years. I've read a lot of praise for Edward Norton, but I didn't really see all too much that stood out from his usual performances. On the technical side of things, the long takes are quite impressive. Getting these scenes to play out properly couldn't have been an easy task, but they play out smoothly. Story wise, there really isn't much here besides Keaton's redemption, and even that gets rushed towards the end. The film just seems to plod along and bounce from side plot to side plot. The pacing is also another issue, despite being a decent two hours, the first half of the film feels like it drags on. By the time the credits roll, I didn't feel like I witnessed anything special outside of two fantastic performances.
The 2015 Oscar winning film Birdman is a quite a difficult movie to review. It has so many interesting ideas/concepts and is technical and artistic at the same time. The film examining the psyche and passion of acting and directing and the contrast of critics and audiences desires was well written. Keaton's personal battle with family, friends and trying to resurrect what his career was also quite interesting. Birdman is filled with excellent scenes and performances as well. The direction style of placing the movie all as one long take was also interesting adding a technical element of the film. Birdman overall really is a movie fanatic fantasy, but at the same time is somewhat of a difficult movie to enjoy. Although it made me think. and I respected and enjoyed the performances, technical and artistic elements of the film, I would not really want to see it again and nor would I say its one of my favorites.
Fun, quirky, and a little too self assured, Birdman is a good comeback for Michael Keaton.
really stupid and boring
Spectacular. I've never seen anything like it.
one of the worst movies ever!!
Whoever said  All the world's a stage & all of us actors was full of shit. I'm so happy I can't act. A truly great professional actors life must be a screaming hell. One I'd rather pass up.
there was mixed reviews about this film so I was unsure. I decided to give it a shot when it came on Netflix. I quite enjoyed it. unsure what happen at the very end, if u have a theory let me know I have a few but I'll keep quite till u see it.
Unique and ambitious - it won't appeal to everyone but I thought it was excellent. Great music too. Edited up to five stars after watching 'the making of'. Groundbreaking, risky, intelligent and impressive.
It was like watching the Hollywood sign jerk off for two hours.An awful attempt at a 21st century 'All About Eve,' but replacing a brilliant script with all the accouterments that makes the 21st century barely habitable; as the title suggests, creating virtue of stupidity. Aimlessly wandering in search of meaning, and never finding it, outside of sporadic fits of emoting, behind a jazz beat. Furthermore, I don't trust movies with hand-held, all throughout. The ending is so symbolic. The actor on stage pretend shoots himself in the face... the audience delivers a rousing applause. He then is credited with creating a new form of method acting -- what wrestlers in the '60s referred to as blading. If only somebody put this film out of its misery, I'd respond in like manner. Self-important, pretentious, theater drivel. Vile, nihilist, dreck, featuring the worst of humanity. Hence, an Oscar.
Pretentious nonsense. Burn it.
this putrid piece of dung beat out American Sniper???? Oh the INJUSTICE!!!!! What a piece of crap movie this was...ugh....
Despite some unnecessary things whose only serve to jeopardize the entire well done movie as the medusa or the asteroid at the start and at the end of the movie, Birdman is a creative and innovative movie that tests all the cast which answers with outstanding performances, which with a help of an original story, well fundamented and organized screenplay and stunning visual, can interest to the spectator for being an unique movie
Despite some unnecessary things whose only serve to jeopardize the entire well done movie as the medusa or the asteroid at the start and at the end of the movie, Birdman is a creative and innovative movie that tests all the cast which answers with outstanding performances, which with a help of an original story, well fundamented and organized screenplay and stunning visual, can interest to the spectator for being an unique movie
Mindbogglingly overrated and so disappointing and crude given that it's from that otherwise brilliant auteur Inarritu.
Aluciné. Para verla en el cine.
A weird, yet intriguing film. The way they shot this film is outstanding! It was also great to see Michael Keaton in the lead role. Good fun...
With a helping of wonderful acting and messages about how society has evolved in entertainment from past decades, Birdman surely was one of the best movies of 2014 but is slowed down by a small amount of meaningless dialogue that made the message of the movie seem cheesy in a sense.
Atuações espetaculares de Michael Keaton Emma Stone e acima de tudo Edward Norton.
Birdman is a neat film technically, but conservatively it says nothing new. Oh, and it could have ended so many times but it just kept going. The saving grace is the performances and the script. Definitely not the best picture winner in my eyes.
Revolutionary in camera work. Not to mention Keaton, Norton, Galifianakis, Watts, Stone... Everyone in this movie owns it.
If you are a fan of performances and originality in filmmaking, then Birdman is right up your alley. It really is like nothing you've ever seen. I though it was fantastic! Has to be a virtual lock to win best cinematography next week. As good as Michael Keaton is, Edward Norton is better; and that's saying a lot because Keaton is superb. I waited a week to write this and I'm glad, because it has sunk in and Birdman is remarkable. See it.
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's magnificent surrealistic black comedy that concerns a washed up actor named Riggan Thomson, played brilliantly by Michael Keaton, in a grand career comeback, which earned him an Academy Award nomination, and a Golden Globe Award win for Best Actor, he is famous for portraying an iconic superhero called Birdman some 25 year ago. In a bid to make a comeback, he struggles to mount a Broadway play which he has written and directed. In the days leading up to opening night, he battles with his lunatic Method actor co-star, played to flamboyant perfection by Edward Norton, who earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor here, and his obstinate daughter, marvelously played by Emma Stone, who recieved an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actress, and the persistent presence of his Birdman alter ego, which at moments throughout the film suggest that he may be losing his grip on reality. Masterful direction by Inarritu, with superlative supporting performances by Naomi Watts, Zach Galifianakis, Jeremy Shamos, and Andrea Riseborough, but its Michael Keaton's towering turn that totally dominates this howlingly funny motion picture. There is an extraordinary script by Inarritu, Nicolas Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Amando Bo, and stunning cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki. Antonio Sanchez' musical score is terrific. A phenomenal cinematic triumphant, and one of the year's finest films. Winner of 4 Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Best Original Screenplay: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Best Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki. Highly Recommended.
this film was something completely different! all filmed in around 2 shots it was completely groundbreaking. the cinematography was the best ive ever seen! the acting was just as good with brilliant performances from litterally the whole cast especially emma stone and michael keaton. Michael shines probably because he can relate to his character himself. it was completely convincing and if he doesn't completely reboot his career from this then something is wrong. the script was fantastic and as soon as I watched it, I felt like I needed to again. it provided every genre you could think off; comedy,drama,action,thriller. what a film.
Armed with beautiful visuals, an emotive cast and interesting screenplay, Birdman was a pleasure to watch.
Strange, beautiful and unique. Tapping into Michael Keaton's past which ironically resembles the character's past too Batman, have digged up Keaton's hidden talent to dazzle us with a great performance along with the rest of the cast. And the idea of shooting the movie in one take made it more intriguing.
Awesome movie....Totally jazzy physcho.... - Iain Perry
Whereas Boyhood was monumental in that it took risks in the fact that it was shot over 12 years, Birdman is monumental in that the film is essentially supposed to feel like it is all done in one long take (aside from the beginning and ending of the film).There are many great aspects of this film, the first being the amazing cast of actors. Michael Keaton leads this cast with an incredible performance, having to show different personalities through his Birdman persona as well as the washed up Riggan, who is very passionate about the performing arts to say the least. I have not seen The Theory of Everything, so I cannot call Redmayne's win for best leading actor a snub, but I can say that Keaton was at his best and I am glad he was considered for the Oscar.My favorite performance of the film, however, comes from Edward Norton, and this might be my 2nd favorite performance of the year behind J.K. Simmons in Whiplash. Norton is this superhero of an actor, Mike, who is so devoted to realism that he drinks actual gin to get the feel of an era, or that he gets hard as he delves into a sexual experience his character is having. It is particularly fun to watch him give suggestions to and act in front of Riggan to show true artistry - Norton's acting within acting is right on the money.As for the visuals of this film, A+. Amazing concept to do a film in one long take (what is supposed to feel like one take) especially when this take requires moving the camera all over the place around this theatre setting.However, this film does seem overly repetitive at points, striking home the idea that we're not living as we are meant to live. This comes from lines such as stop looking through your phones and actually experience something and various rants. While I am a big fan of monologues, this film seems a little monologue-heavy in order to get its philosophy across. Emma stone rants about how Riggan wants significance in his life though he is not important; Riggan rants to the critic that she doesn't truly understand meaning (or significance); Norton rants that you have to delve into literature - in this case plays - to find their significance; you see the pattern, right?I like the ambiguity of the ending, but it could have ended stronger in a different spot. This different spot I refer to made my heart race so much during my first viewing of the film. I will not spoil the last shot of the film, but I like that though it does not give a clear explanation of its final shot, Birdman meshes the realistic with the unrealistic, just how Riggan has been in and out of the unreality of the play he is putting on throughout the movie.I highly recommend this film; a great drama that contains a lot of smart comedy.
The way it was shot, is it pretentious? You could say that.But I bought it, I bought all of it. An enormously entertaining movie.
I don't see this movie as being worthy of best picture. I think it had some very good performances with an average story and an unsatisfying ending.
Acting is well done, but very odd and strange movie
Stellar cast and impeccable screen play. Really enjoyed this one.
This shows exactly what you can do with the art of filmmaking when the people involved get creative. This is art, and not just art, but beautiful art that shines in every aspect of the word. It's almost like watching not actors acting, but real people interacting with each other throughout the story.
A wonderful bit of magic realism where life imitates art initiates life
With its genius cinematography and great performances from its cast speaking out the impeccable script that shows some form of clever satire of the present Hollywood business, this is a great masterpiece of the cinema from director Alejandro G. Iñárritu at his outstanding breakthrough to deliver such film. Although it may not be better than Boyhood, but, however, it's was now proven that this is the true winner for the year 2014's Best Picture. (A)(Full review coming soon)
Visually striking and directorially beautiful this movie was great.
What a weird yet compelling film
Utterly pretentious. Clever, but glaringly self conscious and ultra snobby just like egomaniacal characters that inhabit this color-by-numbers, dull, piss poor excuse of a quasi-noir. If you admitted to liking this, then you clearly just wanted to impress your 'smarter' friends, and didn't get it at all. God! I hate snobs so much.
Loved it. It reminded me of familiar people and environments.
One of the most unique and engaging comedies you'll ever see. Alejandro GonzÃÃ,Ã,¡lez IÃÃ,Ã,±ÃÃ,Ã,¡rritu is a master director, and Michael Keaton's performance is Oscar-worthy.
Review:I really had high hopes for this movie because it done so well at the box office and most of the critics gave it a great write up but now that I have watched it, I feel quite disappointed. I was able to stay away from the spoilers so I didn't know that the film was set around the theatre, which I found quite boring after a while. Anyway, the movie is about a actor who became famous by playing the role as Birdman but once he stops playing the capped superhero, the work dries up and he struggles to hit the spotlight again. He then finances a Broadway play and his career and reputation rides on the play becoming a success. Whilst preparing for the opening night, his relationship with his daughter (Stone), his ex-wife (Amy Ryan), the leading actor (Norton), his pregnant girlfriend (Riseborough) and his annoying alter ego (Birdman), all play a part in making Riggan Thomson (Keaton) lose his mind, especially with a critic on his back who threatens to shut his play down. By the time that he hits the stage, the pressure really takes its toll and he takes drastic measures to finally find some peace. The storyline is original and I couldn't believe how long one shot was. The acting is superb from Keaton and the rest of the cast but I still wasn't that impressed with the concept or the direction that the movie took. I kept on waiting for something amazing to happen but it felt like a dull drama about a depressed man. I liked when his alter ego came into play, with the explosions and the massive dinosaur and I also liked the chemistry between Keaton & Norton but it did get a bit messy after a while because there was way too much going on. That's not too say that it's not a cleverly made film but it just wasn't my cup of tea. Watchable!Round-Up:Michael Keaton is another actor who I enjoy watching since Mr. Mom, Gung Ho, Beetlejuice, Clean & Sober, the Dream Team and Nightshift in the 80's. I liked him as Batman but the movies were crap and they really damaged his career. There are a few innuendos in this film which make it look like his alter ego was geared towards Batman but thats not on the record. He has played a part in Robocop, Need For Speed, Minions and the Other Guys but he didn't play a major role. Personally, I think he's a great actor but he has just made a lot of bad choices like Herbie Fully Loaded and Post Grad. I really couldn't see this role played by anyone else and this movie definitely wouldn't be as big as it was without Keaton in the lead. Its just a shame that he lost out at the Oscars to Eddie Redmayne. Anyway, the film was directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu who is currently directing the Revenant with Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy and hes made Babel, 21 Grams and Biutiful. He does have a unique style of directing, which must have been hard to achieve in this movie because the takes were extremely long. I liked the fact that he let Keaton let loose in this movie because it really pushed him to the max and Norton also showed a different side to his acting skills. Anyway, this is a well made film which made a healthy profit at the box office but I was hoping for a bit more.Budget: $18millionWorldwide Gross: $103millionI recommend this movie to people who are into their deep dramas about an has been actor who is performing and financing a play to bring him back into the spotlight. 5/10
Different but really well directed
I gave this movie a B+
Things I enjoy: a) Ridiculous mannered bullshitb) Films about films / acting / the creative processc) That impose technical constraints upon themselves and the resulting virtuoso convolutions (see also point a above)d) Magic realisme) Emma Stonef) New YorkTherefore Birdman is very much For Me, though I can see why it split opinion too.
This movie is nothing but a confusing mess. It's too difficult to get into, and you don't even know what's going on. The performances we're excellent, but they don't fully cover up how boring and tasteless it is. I'm sure if I ask all my friends about this movie, they would give me the same response. This could make an excellent play, but not an excellent film. It only relies on it's pointless symbolism that just leaves a mess of things from the very beginning to end.
Weird, but somewhat the truth about famous actors doing B rated movies like Jessica alba in machete
Though a technically notable, this film, ironically, has the excitement of a washed up Hollywood actor trying to be a serious on Broadway. In other words, see it once, say, Oh that was interesting, and never think about it again. The script is awful. It's the real life equivalent of a widowed elderly woman's cat's shit. But not like normal cat shit. Its like the cat shit of a cat that is fed bottled water and hand prepared meals by someone who has nothing else better to do but pamper an animal as their sad life wastes away. Get the point? No? That means its pretentious, full of itself, predictable, and utterly sad that it's respected. When I imagine how this film won the Academy Award for best film, I picture a bunch of ol chaps standing around a fire in a mansion in Tuxedos. One man says M'yes this film is about us! Let us vote for it! Another man then suggests they fart and smell each others asses. This film is so far up its own ass its actually came out of its own mouth and went into another pretentious douche bags ass hole. I hate films that are artsy for the sake of being artsy. Its like that awkward person you knew in college who tries really hard to be different yet lists The Big Bang Theory and American Idol as their favorite TV shows. If I haven't beaten the dead horse enough ill just straight up tell you, I hate this script. Moving on, I didn't particularly feel much towards Michael Keaton's performance. I thought it was relatively bland and predictable. I found myself wanting him to fail and everything to fall apart around him. I actually was rooting for him to kill himself. Literally I was watching the movie and thinking JUST JUMP ALREADY! Emma Stone accepted a shit part that she shouldn't have. That predictable Hollywood child who has been to rehab, smokes pot, and wants to sleep with the guy that drives her dad crazy. Woopidy fucking doo.The only acting bright spot was Edward Norton. And that's probably only because I really like Edward Norton. Norton plays the difficult actor Mike Shiner very well and his boner scene was the only time I laughed in the film. Literally, the best part of this movie is a boner scene. The cinematography was notable and the film was shot to look like a continuous shot. Something people are saying was innovative and never done before. Yes it has, Hitchcock's Rope comes to mind. Except that film was good and was real art. Then there's the whole predictable critic who doesn't like it because he's a Hollywood actor. She wants to destroy him. She's right. This isn't freaking art. It's someone trying to be artsy. And she also reminds me why I hate critics from major markets. Their heads have disappeared up their own ass so far they think things are good that aren't. That actually describes the critic's positive reviews of this film pretty well. They are wrong. This film sucks.
Wasn't worth the $6.50 movie ticket. Not even funny. No logic. Terrible.
Energetic, technically brilliant and a lot of fun.
A movie that will not be forgotten anytime soon. Great acting from Edward Norton and Michael Keaton and absolutely amazing editing.
Ambiguity. Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) is rife with it. Take its title for instance; it is literally impossible to come to a conclusion regarding its purpose as it either misleads or baffles. Birdman retains the danger of either getting it right by emphasising the richness of its material or simply confusing you with its inability to provide complete clarity. Birdman offers a plot so hard to explain in a few sentences for there is so many avenues the plot attacks with ingenuity building a layered story filled with tonnes of critical entertainment. Birdman tells the tale of Riggan Thomson, a washed up Hollywood actor famous for his role as the superhero Birdman, struggling to mount a Broadway adaptation of writer Raymond Carverâ??s â??What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.â?? Riggan is tormented by the voice of Birdman who criticises his career downturn whilst also imagining himself performing psychological feats, which embodies him as the ultimate unreliable protagonist. Using a piece of literature to instigate his career rejuvenation, Riggan must overcome the voice in his head, the pressures of performing and his own unattainable expectations in order to escape his life crisis indefinitely. Ex-Batman crusader Michael Keaton stars as the protagonist Riggan Thomson and this performance has injected, like his character sorely seeks, a career stimulation as he has popped out of nowhere with some stellar acting. Especially in the second half of the film where the spotlight increasingly focuses on Riggan, Keaton delves completely into the role pinning it down for us all to commend. Edward Nortonâ??s portrayal of Mike Shiner, the popular Broadway actor cast in a supporting role brings out the best in Riggan as they furiously yet intimately interchange words with one another on a number of times. If the second half of the film is Keatonâ??s, Norton absolutely steals the opening as he bursts onto the screen with a pizzazz that attracts you further in. Emma Stone stars as Rigganâ??s daughter Sam and on occasions she really steals the show as she imposes herself with a mixture of a damaged façade wrapped up in a commanding aura. Stone is one of the brightest actors of the new generation and at 26, Birdman will change her career, especially that she is now an Oscar nominee now! Naomi Watts stars as Lesley, Mikeâ??s girlfriend and an actress in the production. Zach Galifianakis, with a minor yet impactful performance, portrays Jake, Rigganâ??s lawyer, friend and producer of the show. For those of you that donâ??t know Galifianakis, he is Alan from The Hangover and considering there has not been a film of him portraying someone other than a total idiot, his performance in Birdman is a shock to witness. With Keaton, Norton and Stone nominated for Oscars, Birdman is a talented acting fest. Riggan believes himself he is Birdman and tries to convince us that he is who he says he is, but such unrealism is not possible and therefore everything you see must be questioned. There are simple ways to prove that he isnâ??t an actual superhero with superpowers but the ending leaves you sitting on the fence hoping his belief in himself is real. The problem is that we never get to know! It is frustrating because there is never complete transparency and at the end when you want a resolution, more ambiguity arrives. Riggan is a tormented soul that you want to believe can defeat his demons and become who he wants to be but you struggle to remain convinced that he can do it. He is an unreliable protagonist as his desires transgress the boundaries of believability and transpire on the screen as his truth so you must never believe what you see until the passage of clarity arrivesâ?¦ but wait, it never actually does, so Birdman is right down to its core an ambiguous character study. These films stay with you long after youâ??ve left the cinema for their lack of closure that leaves you imagining what could have been, but their irritation factor is sky high because closure is the best form of satisfaction nowadaysâ?¦ hopefully there is no Birdman 2! The technical marvel that is Birdman is evident as the film is made to look like one big long take. Scenes never cut to show the hours and days changing, instead opposing scenes are morphed together so brilliantly that as a character travels into a new location, time changes along the way. It really is amazing to witness, as it never loses your focus, as it doesnâ??t let you lose connection with the proceedings. 2 hours will fly past and you will have experienced a layered story that functions as one big block in a manâ??s short-term life. The personal shortcomings of Riggan provide a basis for his possibly false mental capacity to dominate the technical side to filmmaking. His abilities range from levitation to telekinesis but it appears in the most peculiar of surroundings, a theatre; a place of entertainment that for actors is the paramount podium of realism. Such a juxtaposition of fiction and realism could be seen as a trying to give audiences the best of both worlds, but instead it opens up another avenue to layer this already layered world with social criticism. Birdman is a critical study of society and its growing divide between people on the same social wavelength and people who are out of touch with how to satisfy or feel satisfied by society. The story essentially revolves around a manâ??s inability to attract the same success he had in the past because of how much he is out of touch with the present. This highlights the prevalent problem with the youth of today as only the spectacular, brainless form of entertainment can be the only form of pleasure people receive as everything else is out of touch, past it sell by date or just simply has too much talking. Forms of entertainment such as theatre or books with rich history and imaginative entertainment are ignored and overlooked in favour of 6-second instant entertainment in the form of Vineâ??s and social media that provide no form of enrichment, merely short-term pleasure. Birdman highlights the fact that the only way to be great in todayâ??s society is if your connected to social platforms that notice you for your new form of extremity, not talent. A scene that springs to mind in particularly is when the Stone argues with Riggan stating he is out of touch with society because he doesnâ??t â??even have a Facebook page!â?? It appears social media is a necessity and a good old-fashioned piece of literature transported to the stage cannot be loved globally because someoneâ??s head isnâ??t being shot off or helicopterâ??s arenâ??t crashingâ?¦ well, they may be but Birdman isnâ??t relying on them for entertainment, but instead using it is as clout to their critical study of being in touch with society. Like The Grand Budapest Hotel, Birdman has been nominated 9 times at the Oscars. The Grand Budapest Hotel is a flawless piece of art and should be the Best Picture winner but I wouldnâ??t be inconsolable if Birdman won as it has a quirky originality to itself that Budapest has in abundance. For a film of 119 minutes, Birdman is a feast of a film that provides a banquet of original moviemaking entertainment in a short space of time.Birdman provides tonnes to be entertained from, critical of and mesmerised at as a result of its resonant script and intense acting. â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â??â?? 9/10
Best picture and 5-star reviews all over the place. Sorry this is a turkey (see what i did there). We get that actors are vain and riddled with insecurity. It's just been done a 100 times before. Vanya on 42nd Street did this 20-years ago. This would have made a great French & Saunders sketch, and 10 mins so much more bearable than 119 mins. Great tracking shots though.
Weird but a brilliant voice
Why is this in the 90% range. It was awful. It wasn't even good on an intellectual level. If by layered they mean it was all over the place. It's like it couldn't decide what genre it wanted to be. Parts were ok I guess. I'm just upset I spent money to see this after seeing such a high rating on here.
Had to turn this off after 30 minutes of tediumNo wonder he didn't get an academy award, struggling to figure out how this got such good reviews
????? ??? ?? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????. ?? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ??? ??????
Michael Keaton kills it.
Really weird. Interestingly so. But really weird.
Quirky, metaphorical, and highly technical.
BIRDMAN is directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarrittu and stars Michael Keaton as a former movie superhero who takes it upon himself to direct, write and star in a Broadway play. Joining him are Zack Galifianakis, Naomi Watts, Emma Stone, and Edward Norton who play his agent, fellow cast members, and daughter. My initial thoughts when starting it weren't too great, but I gradually came to appreciate it a little more for its technical achievement and some interesting observations on the lives of actors. Still, in a film about the ego of actors and the importance of artistic expression (among other things), it came off as egotistical and self-important. Without giving away specifics or plot spoilers, I can say that the film is very meta. Michael Keaton is playing a character who has some similarities, or shares some DNA, with his real-life persona, as does Edward Norton (apparently). Michael Keaton's Riggan Thompson is a former blockbuster movie star who is trying to do something artistic for personal validation, and Edward Norton's Mike Shiner is a method actor who probably takes his job a little too seriously. For me, those two characters (and their interactions) form the central dialogue and message the film is trying to get across. They also had the most interesting dynamic in the story. What I didn't necessarily warm up to was the rather cynical attitude it had towards critics and big-budget filmmaking. And some of the magical realism came off as labored attempts to be clever. Elements that did work a little more include Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography, giving the film a Malickian feel, and the drum score. Overall, I would say that I appreciated the film for what it is more than actually liking or enjoying it. It has an impeccable technical construction, but a lot of the dialogue and overt messaging felt more like therapy for actors and didn't engage me like a straightforward drama normally would. Even though this is Inarrittu's most playful film yet, it made me long for the emotional manipulation of something like 21 GRAMS. There is a time and place for different kinds of movies, and the way the film takes sides when they both feed into each other was rather disingenuous. I can understand why this film did so well at the Oscars, because Hollywood always likes patting themselves on the back, but it has mixed results as entertainment.
Technically excellent with great performances. Otherwise overbearing and insufferable.
After sitting through an hour of woody allen style drama I couldn't watch any more. Maybe the second hour is completely different but it can't possibly be good enough to make the whole film watchable.
How was this movie rated so high??? The acting was superb I'll admit. And the long camera cuts was impressive......but the script was awful! I guess that's the point of the movie cause I rather see the Birdman 4 he didn't want to do than whatever it was that I watched!
Celebrity vs. acting ability. That's the main issue that haunts Riggan. It is underscored by dialogue in the movie that crystalizes the core or guts of the story. Riggan was under such emotional strain in both his personal and professional lives that the issue appeared to manifest in to severe mental illness: the voice of Birdman taunting him and mocking him; the hallucinations of his ability to levitate and move objects; hallucinations of Birdman appearing before him. This is what probably led Riggan to shoot his nose off while on stage in the final act. (Was it a failed suicide attempt? An attempt to act out the drama of his failed marriage after having a relevant discussion with his ex-wife minutes before?) Riggan then commits suicide by jumping out of the window of a hospital when Birdman's presence persisted to plague him as did the unhappiness in his life, in spite of the success of the Broadway play. It seems so paradoxical that a huge success on Broadway, which was hard fought and which Riggan shared with the other actors, resulted in such a morbid ending. Did Riggan not prove himself to be a great actor and not merely a celebrity arising from the remnants of Birdman? Does irony make good movies? The tone and ending of Birdman reminds me of Woody Allen's Cassandra's Dream. The parts that illustrate psychological breakdown are similar to Black Swan.
Not perfect. But still remarkable in every possible way.
Tried to watch this movie with my wife and we could not get past the first 40 minutes. We heard good things about this flick but once again it was artistic jibberish from the so called critics. Good thing we turned it off and saved some of our life to enjoy something else.
Quite dark and twisted, certainly not a joyful movie. But the jazz drums and the super long take camera styles kept me hooked. performances were powerful too. can't fully condone the language and indecency of the movie, so for it to get a 4/5 is pretty impressive.
Was super excited to watch this based on reviews and awards this movie won. It was disappointing for me. A talking movie that I found very boring at times and tended to drag on. Acting wise very good. Everything else wise not so good. The music score throughout the movie was putrid. It was this annoying jazzy drumming score that literally became so obnoxious I couldn't focus on anything else. Also, I hated the ending (the last scene of the movie before the credits). Overall, it just wasn't that good.
Birdman is by far one of the most interesting films I've had the pleasure of watching. The technical elements were amazing. The long-continuous shot style was something that I'd never seen before, but as it was executed perfectly, it contributed to the already existent theatrical genre/atmosphere. The performances from the talented cast was, without a doubt, the highlight of this masterpiece. And that is an understatement. This film is a masterpiece.
Stylishly filmed but the content was puddle deep. Not sure what all the fuss is about.
4.25. I haven't been a blockbuster movie star, but I related with the story almost too much. The final scene was probably unnecessary.
A waste of time. The only positive thing that I can say is that I only spent $6 to rent it instead of full price at the theater. Boring as h3ll.
Technically, the film is a masterpiece with the entire movie being shot in one continuos film role. However, the viewer questions what he or she is suppose to take from the movie. Along with what should be considered a awkward score l, the film seems to have too many flaws to be awarded Best Picture.
Strange. The very good acting, casting, camera work and the editing .. These alone will win it awards, for that reason it's three stars otherwise it would be two. Worth seeing but be warned its not an action hero movie or a comedy as four young lads who came to it thought. Watch the trailer and don't just look at the title n poster. Oh and look out for The Shining corridor carpet shot... I so wanted to leap up and shout The Shining Hotel while pointing at the screen. Nice.
This is a masterpiece of ensemble acting, filmmaking, cinematography and not talking down to it's audience. Perfection, and it's name is Birdman.
I just created an account here to rate this film. The only thing that I liked about this movie is when something actually happens in the last 15 minutes, I had an overwhelming feeling of joy that the movie was going to end.
Fully deserving of the Best Picture Oscar, this movie captures your attention from the start of its one shot and doesn't let go.
To all the naysayers out there, aside from the unique execution of the film, focus on the DIALOGUE, because pretty much all of it is social commentary or thought-provoking words of some kind, and it is surprisingly deep and amazing. It took a second viewing for me to really get a good grip of the film as a whole as well as appreciate its dialogue and execution but man, this really makes one hell of an all time favorite classic! And what really hits it home for me is that THEY JUST WENT FOR IT! I mean, in everything! Not just the stunning and unique and original way they shot the film, but in the clever commentary, in the parodies, in the surprisingly real and at times hilarious dialogue, in the artsy psychology of the main character, in the crazy scenes (Michael Keaton vs Edward Norton fight, A LESBIAN KISSING SCENE), in the score (which is just drums), everything! It's the kind of film that you can't appreciate in just one or two watches, because this film really is a lot deeper in many ways, and not in the typical way art films are but in a very refreshing, more real way.And you see, this kind of film wouldn't have worked at all if everything wasn't done to near perfection (I mean, just imagine seeing the script of this along with all the ideas for how it should be executed annotated along the side - CRAZY!). The acting is unbelievably great, not just from Michael Keaton (who, btw, the film's main character is parodying - in case you are not familiar with the guy - in not only how he hasn't really been in anything since 1992, but he last played BATMAN, which is very comparable to the film's main character and Birdman), but the whole cast, all-round, and I was especially surprised by Emma Stone. I already had a good opinion of her as an actress before the film, but she raised the bar for herself! The scene where she just rants out at her father had my jaw drop to the floor, and this is a very different role for her compared to other films that she's been in, and she does it so well.Now some people talk about how they don't get the plot, and really, this isn't that kind of movie! This is a movie where the dialogue dominates, and not a twisty-turny plot. Aside from the rants of the characters that has got the film critics saying this film is social commentary and what-not, there are a lot of moments that were surprisingly hilarious. And that's really what sets this film apart from other artistic films - aside from the actual deep real things it has to say about life and fame and film, it has a great humor to it.And just like everything I already mentioned, the characters are also not so straightforward and deep. The character Edward Norton plays, while a jerk, if you listen to what he says, he actually says the truth, and it reminds me of so many of my favorite characters, like House, Sherlock Holmes, just to name the most well-known. The character of Michael Keaton, though to different degrees, really represents pretty much everyone with a dream/failed dream/past-his/her-time, and if you think through what he's going through, you can find what he's struggled through in the movie in yourself, and that just makes the film even grander for me, because that makes me reflect on my life and how I chase my dreams.I could go on and on and to the reader who has stuck to this point in my review, I wish I could just watch the movie with you next to me so that I could point out all the awesome things this movie has with it, but alas.
A story about a man who may or may not have powers
Really enjoyed this film. Never seen broadway show but this great look behind it all makes seem like great experience. Acting and characters are all terrific. Glad I bought it, sorry it took me so long to watch it.
This film, is an experience
Highly theatrical, with a purpose. Birdman is well edited and well acted and makes for a compelling film.
Probably my favorite movie of all time. The way it is shot is superb making you believe it was all shot in one take. The acting is phenomenal and I believed every single line. Film perfection.
Unique experience no doubt
pas capable de finir le film.
The play within a play motif is used here to great advantage as an aging actor famous for pablum seeks to redeem his self-worth by mounting a prestigious piece on Broadway, that place where legions of the acting community believe is Shangri-La. He has problems, of course, and that mainly being that no one around him really gives a hoot regardless, and there are many of these. The work is involving, and an astute commentary on modern life in Western civilization.
Brilliant film.I only decided to watch this movie after being advised to from a friend. I didn't believe the hype surrounding the film. I thought it was going to be to style over substance with what I had heard, But after watching it I understand the hype. The film is very well directed, the long scenes following the characters around the stage etc makes the movie feel very real along with the great acting, which gets your attention. The story is good made even better by the casting choices. A all round good filmWell worth a watch.
I was let down, mostly because of the buildup. I enjoyed it but wouldn't say it's the best of the year. Creative, almost too over the top. I'd recommend it, but not as a must see
I am hardly ever compelled to write a review but feel the burning need to let unsuspecting viewers know that this movie is just awful. It's unenjoyable from start to finish and you just keep looking at your watch hoping it's close to ending. It's not the acting (it has A-list actors), it's the story itself and the filming which is simply atrocious. With movies like The Imitation Game and American Sniper up for an Oscar and this one wins, shows me that the Academy is made up of overly artsy America haters with very simply minds and low IQ's and I officially will never listen to their opinion again. Anyone who rated this movie highly is just trying to keep up with the Joneses. Birdman is nothing but hype. And as if the movie itself wasn't bad enough, the music in the movie was some guy incessantly banging on drums the entire duration. I wanted to gouge out my eardrums. But hey, if you enjoy very unlikeable characters, psycho babble, bizarre filmography, and a very forgettable plot that just drags on for what seems like an eternity, then maybe you'll like this existentialistic piece of garbage.
I'm pained to say that I didn't love Birdman, as the single-shot cinematography was executed fluidly and delightfully. It's ambitious. Even Gravity had a few cuts littered throughout the film on occasion. Birdman, from the introduction of Michael Keaton as washed-up actor Riggan (formerly titular star of superhero film 'Birdman'; great casting) meditating in the air to the intense on-stage climax, has no cuts. This condition certainly limits director Alejandro Gonzalez in reward for unique results. Admirable, too, considering how costume and makeup changes had to be at Broadway level for certain transitions to work. I doubt that Gonzalez would cheat via editing. The music feels like New York and Broadway, switching between familiar classical movements and the showmanship of a sole jazz drummer. We become familiar with the layout of the Broadway theater that the movie takes place in, and the streets around the theater. On the subject of familiarity, since this film centers around Keaton's play production, we also become familiar with certain scenes of the play, and each repetition feels drastically different. As an actor, I empathized with those in the production, in fear of the show fucking up at any moment, or at the worst moment.Strangely, what happens on stage or in public was far more interesting than the exposition behind the curtain. Besides Michael Keaton, the other stage actors are hardcore method acting and controlling-in-compensation-for-flaccid-penis Edward Norton, the sexually unsatisfied Naomi Watts, and emotionally unsatisfied Andrea Riseborough. Keaton's character has a daughter, played by Emma Stone, who got out of rehab and blames Keaton for the err of her ways. What's unfortunate about the cinematography is that Gonzalez limited himself to focusing on one or two characters for an extended time, inherently leaning towards the Birdman. I can't articulate how the minor characters change, as the movie abandons their side stories well before the climax.That leaves us with Birdman/Riggan. His character is a wreck, despite directing and starring in a Broadway show. He is constantly unsatisfied with his show, primarily because Norton is hogging the spotlight from him. Combined with one critic's promise to destroy the show and on-stage embarrassments, Keaton is in constant conflict with his former self, a true superhero. Literally. He has mental, sometimes physical, arguments with himself in a Birdman costume. Keaton's losses and victories over himself, and the world, might be the first time I discovered how talented he really is, beyond his works with Tim Burton. Within Keaton's vision, we see him exploit telekinetic powers and the ability to fly. No one else sees that though. I won't spoil the climax, but what happens afterwards warps what I assumed to be the real world. Rather than people seeing Keaton as mentally ill, they hail him as a truly groundbreaking actor. The film ends with others seeing him as the superhero, as Keaton flies around New York City and possibly fights crime. I understand that the superpowers are metaphorical. That's not what I'm talking about. By the end, I couldn't tell what Birdman wanted to be. A satire on the celebrity culture of Broadway, in comparison to Hollywood? A 'hyperrealistic' depiction of how less successful shows can beat the odds and trump the critics? It can't be both, so whatever the screenwriters and Gonzalez were going for, I'm opting for neither. The lack of focus and undeveloped characters are disappointing. It may not be the decades-to-last art piece that I wanted, but I would still recommend seeing this once for the cinematography alone, with committed performances, some enthralling scenes, and a definite New York feel as bonuses.
The acting and message are great but this movie wasn't, in my opinion, good enough to justify its many academy awards. It's a solid movie, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it is as good as advertised.
Quirky and offbeat, beautifully shot with excellent performances; it's not for everyone, but well worth a watch!
One long take, dramatic tension rising, actors and characters who never make the fault of overshadowing one another, and a metaphor that stays poignant and challenging. However, just likemost dramas on the stage today, the shock factor was too much the focus from frame to frame in this film. We follow Keaton from almost beginning to end entirely, but we don't make the same leap with him off the ledge and something gets lost in translation to the point we don't understand Stone's character's change. Overall? Birdman is fun to watch.
I liked it. But I don't get why this won so many awards. I think it reflected Hollywood actors/actresses insecurities. It was ok (i hung in because i got told i should) but it was like watching a Wes Anderson film with no satisfactory ending ie like watching The Life Aquatic vs The Darjeeling Ltd. Where the worst thing is everyone loved the Darjeeling and hated The Life Aquatic (which i loved the most ) and I wanted so much but didn't get the Darjeeling. But Birdman is like that, A Wes Anderson tribute that fails. The actors are brilliant in their roles but.... i just don't know why it was what it was...
Absolutely breathtaking.
I had heard this movie was good, amazing in fact, but I wasn't convinced it wasn't hyperbole. It never failed to deliver! Every aspect of this film is impressive. From the technical requirements of shooting to make the film seem like one to shot, to the incredible performances given by Norton, Stone and especially Keaton it never stops surprising and rewarding you for watching. The exploration of family, love and regret is complimented by the themes of identity, sacrifice and celebrity vs reverence. The similarities between Keaton's and Riggan's careers only add another layer to this already we'll put together and crafted script. Add to that the exploration of the relationship between Hollywood and Broadway, and the prejudices both have for one another and you have a highly entertaining, thought provoking, moving hilarious film. If you a fan of great film making you have to see this movie.
Birdman has an ambitious and insightful glimpse into the human anxiety within public profiling while showing a deeply multi-dimensional story where the cast is outstanding due to strong performances which gives them a chance to actively show the trauma of their characters.
A brilliant allegory of the movie industry, not to mention Michael Keaton's life as well.
Shit. Sexist. Too long.
Dobro je, je li ba materijal za Oskara, to je ve? drugo pitanje.
beautiful and amazingly acted
Aljendro pleases us with his genius camerawork for this film. The performances from Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, and Emma Stone, make the movie even better, this is proof oscar season always pleases. Birdman is one of the greatest films i have EVER seen.
Hollywood loves Hollywood.
The one continuous tracking shot is just another cinematic accomplishment under the belt of Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. Breathtaking visual storytelling, performances that will make you laugh and question existence. Delightfully weird and strange in every way, check Birdman out.
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's directing is superb, great cast and wonderful score by Antonio Sanchez
Ever since 2009 when I started to predict and calculate the Oscars and the chances of winning I've always picked the runenr ups, or I've at least enjoyed the runner ups much more than the film that Wins. Avatar, Social Network, Descendants, Django Unchained, Gravity and Boyhood in a perfect world you would have won but sadly we have to deal with The Hurt Locker (ugh), The King's Speech, The Artist, Argo (ugh), 12 Years a Slave and Now Birdman. if you look at the common pattern of the movies listed, 3 are about perseverance, 3 are about Americans, and more importantly (especially in the more recent years) 3 are about the arts. And that is why Birdman won. Don't get wrong, out of the bunch listed, Birdman is probably the best winner in years, I just don't think it's my favorite movie of the year. What makes Birdman a good movie is how it almost plays out like a play in a play. Like 30 Rock. Everything from the weird lively soundtrack is awesome. The one shot approach is kind of cheesy at times but works well I feel. The satire on America, the need for blockbusters and no one wants the moody films is so spot on it makes you wonder why this movie is so interesting in being that way against the dreck of summer 2014 of Marvel. Still, Birdman I don't feel follows to it's promise. It doesn't amount to anything substantial (you could argue Boyhood didn't either, but I feel a much more emotional connection to that film). The acting is ok, if quirky, nothing really gets resolved and maybe that's the point. I think the movie is more for the interest if you like the arts versus to watch as a good movie.
An intriguing and well shot piece of cinema, the originality of its concept, though beautifully done, does not always deliver on the plot. Otherwise, praiseworthy acting and a few laughs to keep you on your way. Real and hard hitting.
Interestingly different.
Interesting, but slow.
This movie has great performances and stunning visuals and it deserves all its accolades. However, it just isn't for me.
Should've won the best movie Oscar in my opinion beating out whiplash or boyhood by just a bit
Through my eyes I see Whiplash as the real masterpiece of 2014. Despite that however I do feel Birdman rightfully deserved the academy award for best picture. It's directing style is so off the wall and the messages it expresses I found to be so relatable to my own opinions; Birdman is was so refreshingly new and is a best picture film. I'm still salty about Michael Keaton not receiving the best actor award though.
This film was a masterpiece. Alejandro G. Iñárritu and Emmanuel Lubezki deserve all the credit in the world for bringing this style of filmmaking that is rarely seen and creating a film that is sure to be studied in film classes everywhere for years to come. Michael Keaton deserved an Oscar, which he sadly didn't win, and even though I'm not sure the film was that great of an accomplishment to win Best Picture, it most certainly deserved every other Oscar it won. Antonio Sánchez should have been nominated for an Oscar and also won.
Easily the best comeback since Robert Downey Jr.
A beautifully crafted satire for the critics, the actors, the theater, movie producers, Hollywood's preference of commercial blockbusters over art-house films and society itself. Empowered with Lubezki's superb cinematography and Keaton's acting, Alejandro's satire is amazing in technical as well as narrative scale.
Aside from the technical prowess that was eminent throughout the film, what made Inarritu's Birdman a success is the electrifying performances from its cast ensemble, as well as an ambitious approach to storytelling and the sub contextual metaphors it encompasses.
Some of the most Impressive and engaging cinematography on the silver screen to date. Not to mention the outstanding performances by the entire cast from Ed Norton to Emma Stone. The film also holds an incredibly interesting story unlike most you'll see. There is no reason not to see Birdman it's just a fantastic film.
This is the best movie of 2014. I loved Michael Keaton in this movie.
An extremely nostalgic 90s feel, this was surprisingly enjoyable to sit through.
Insanely boring and unwatchable, I tried keeping up with the characters and plot but was simply unable to penetrate the sheer inanity of it all. This must have been a movie for the critics. Also, wasn't impressed by the monotone artsy score. It detracted from the movie.
I liked it, and can tell why it was so beloved by the critics. But it's not for me. Michael Keaton is fantastic and it's uniquely shot. Still, it's a little weird....
An actor best known for portraying a movie super hero in younger years attempts a comeback. Keaton, famously known for his Batman films, is perfectly suited to play this fascinating character study with all the detail, angst, and nuance required. An award worthy script and direction take this surreal trip to amazing heights.
Birdman tells the tale of a old actor (Michael Keaton) trying to reinvent himself by doing a play in broadway. From a premise so simple, it possible to twist the story in multiple ways and Alejandro G. Iñárritu has found the best possible roads. The story is so multi-layered it's insane (but great), the actors superb (Keaton and Edward Norton stealing the show) and the cinematography is finest I've seen for awhile. Even after all that, the movie actually has something to say and that made it awesome.
Ideally 7.5. I felt super-tense throughout the whole film.
Good but surreal at times. continuous shots well done.
i loved Michael Keaton in this...superb act ing throughout! if you didn't like it you probably didn't understand it! its about time someone gave him a roll where he could spread his wings and fly!!! (no pun intended) Michael is a highly underrated actor!!
I can see why this film won Best Picture, it is good, in fact great, however films like Birdman that are solely targeted toward an audience of other filmmakers feel very confined, almost saying If you're not involved in the film industry, stay away because it's just not made for the type of audience who simply wants to enjoy a movie. So yes, Birdman is a great film, But it isn't fit for every one to watch, it's fit for filmmakers, it's as simple as that.
Intriguing but can't say I followed it fully! Michael Keaton was pretty phenomenal though...
For me, The best movie of 2014
Michael Keaton was good and the entire movie was very interesting with the continuous shot to make the entire movie seem hyper-realistically-dream-like.
Birdman is a marvel to see. I just can't pick one single word to describe it, it's many things at the same time, film criticism, mind, insanity (my favorite), powers, acting, drama, performance, it's unbealivable.The movie plays it as if it was just one take, one long scene and I loved that, you just have to admit how good a movie is if that movie is so interesting that you hold your pee to watch it and not lost a single second of it.The directing is done flawlessly by González Iñarritu, the same guy that directed Biutiful and Amores Perros.The acting of Edward Norton, Michael Keaton and Emma Stone are like always, great, even Zack Galifianakis was truly amazing in his role.While I feel that the movie wasn't perfect, I can see that is one of the best I will ever see.It creates a big story, it has amazing editing and outstanding themes carryied by good acting, how could I say no to this?
A man's life in reflection of all of the mistakes, is redeemed in his imagination... or are they hallucinations? It was a sad reminder tonot waste your life.
Michael Keaton is obviously Riggan Thompson, no matter who says otherwise (even Keaton). There's a glimmering reason why he picked this role.Gorgeous cinematography packed with the development of multiple characters and some of the best performances I've ever seen, Birdman is a film with Best Picture nomination written all over it. Each scene goes on for what seems like an hour, as director Alejandro Gonzalez IÃÃ,±arritu shifts smoothly between scenes. IÃÃ,±arritu had been much of an unknown, but after a film like Birdman, he will certainly receive the attention he lacked before. I haven't even gotten to the performances yet. Keaton deserves not only a Best Actor nomination, but the award itself. And if only J.K. Simmons didn't exist Norton would be the Best Supporting Actor in a landslide. This is an excellent film and I enjoyed the ending, but it wasn't perfect. I felt it was a bit confusing that he gained the superpower of the Birdman when he was trying to overcome that label. Otherwise, this was an awesome movie that I highly recommend.
Extremely Strange. From a perspective I have never seen before in any film.
I finally watched this and I can't believe it won the Academy award for best picture. I didn't enjoy this movie even though the acting was pretty good. I just couldn't get into it.
loved this movie. the entire cast was amazing and the cinematography was some of the best I've seen in years. I liked the themes of the film with of how people want to leave a lasting impression in the world.
this is the reason why movies should be made in the first place.
The best movie of 2014 and what could be called Michael Keaton's comeback vehicle, this a true masterwork of director Alejandro González Iñárritu, with the continuous, uncut shots and the strong performances of Keaton, Norton, Stone, Watts and Galifianakis, this is a true gem to behold of cinema.
Sin duda pecfecta... Pero PERFECTA, el movimiento de cámara, los papeles, la actuación, el dialogo, LA MUSICA!!!! perfecta
The worst movie I have ever seen, I have already read a lot of other reviews, I feel kind of annoyed, when I realize that some people who claim to be some kind of film critics focus on the Black comedy of the film. Nobody cares about what kind of comedy or broadway stuff the film has. The Film name is BIRDMAN we are talking about one of the most famous cartoon heroes 30 years ago. My question would be WHY? why the film has to use a name like BIRDMAN to show a boring drama, why? they didn't try to name it different, maybe they were afraid that no one would had been interested to watch it.
not what I hoped for
Definitely something different!
All the decisions Inarritu make in Birdman are bold in the biggest sense. They aren't bold for the sake of making a bold movie, but bold because this movie required it. Inarritu has got to be one of the most insane directors breathing for several reasons--reasons that all spawn from Birdman. The technical decision to shoot the entire film in one continuous shot (though there are hidden, seamless cuts, i.e., about two or three) and the decision in the narrative to tell a satirical message mocking specific people who maybe even saw the movie. To me, there seems to be two fundamental messages in Birdman and tantamount to the movie's comedy-drama genre, Birdman has both a satirical (comedic) message and a serious (dramatic) message. The later I won't talk about, but the former (the bold one) I will. To quote Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), Stop living your life through your phone screens people! I might be paraphrasing there, but the mocking, satirical message that this line conveys is that the majority of our generation of moviegoers are those who watch movies like a juvenile, dim-witted kid. Those who come to see movies and not be challenged intellectually in the slightest, but to 'ahh' at an explosion and dose off when those stupid characters start talking again. Birdman is supposedly Riggan Thomson's (Michael Keaton) subconscious and is constantly conflicting with him and telling him, People don't care about this philosophical bull-crap. Again, paraphrasing, but this message Birdman conveys is perfectly contemporary for our generation of Hollywood movies. Because of how contemporary this is, it almost feels like Birdman breaks the 4th wall (which it actually does with Antonio Sanchez's all-drum score). In fact, Birdman almost breaks the 4th wall many times. For instance, there are pop culture references to the Avengers many times. That is why this message works because, as the dialogue mocks, the theme of the movie mocks. Again, Inarritu is very bold in his decisions, but the movie required his boldness if he was going to tell a message as insane as previously discussed.
Just awful. I could care less what happened to any of the characters. It's a movie made for movie people and anyone who said it was good is lying to themselves to make themselves appear more cultured.Terrible. So disappointed. Great acting ... but that does not a good movie make.
Clever direction, some great acting, but a weird, schizophrenic script.
What made this? The genius use of continuous shots and the psychological trip, both of which forced the audience into Keaton's head, even when it hurt to do so. The resulting dialogue and climax should result in an existential quest or fun philosophical debate. On par with Gone Girl as a great film for anyone's first date.
This film never lets you take your eyes away from the movie. You will be fixated on the screen the whole time you watch. Birdman Is as character driven a movie you will ever see. Every actor gives their all in what was my favorite movie of 2014.
Quite simply a milestone in cinematic achievement, not only is Birdman more visually impressive than most summer blockbusters but its as witty as a Tarantino film, as deep as a Nolan film and exposes more about the film industry as a forbes magazine could even dream of. My personal best film of 2014
OMG. WHAT A MOVIE. The acting is terrific, the cinematography is surprising and creative, Michael Keaton is awesome, Emma Stone is great and Edward Norton is funny and is great aswell. a perfect movie
Really disappointing especially after reading previous reviews and featuring one of my favorite actors Edward Norton!
Weird film. But won all the awards.
A nice artistic film as well as having a good narrative.
I don't think it should have won best picture, but it definitely was one of the best movies of 2014
The techniques are kinda pretentious to me, but the critics like it, don't they?
Challenging film to watch because there are only about eight cuts through the length of the feature. The camera just dollies, pans and shadows cast members through various interactions. Keaton and Norton's characters are virtual parodies of their individual personalities.
Weird and confusingly good.
This was too artsy for me. Boring and uninteresting plot. Great acting alone does not make a great movie. Or in this case even a good movie. More like a horrible movie.
Michael Keaton and Edward Norton, need I say more? Flawless.
This is the definition of an artsy movie that most would not like...but you can't ignore the incredible acting. Especially Keaton and Norton specifically. The acting draws you in to a thin, yet original story. The camerawork helped as well and on a down year for films...you have the movie of the year. Although just like Leo (especially Leo) got screwed on the Oscar for wolf of Wall Street...Keaton was equally screwed by losing this years best actor honor. Bottom line is the academy needs some young blood and to stop picking the weight altering (Dallas buyers club) or politically correct true to life roles (Hawkins story). Regardless, Keaton proved something we never knew about him, he can own a role and captivate an audience almost single-handedly.
it was not worth the hype.. I liked it and I love Michael Keaton and Ed Norton.. but I felt the story could and should have been better for all the hype
Birdman rescata la horrible humanidad en cada uno: el egoísmo y la avaricia elevadas en una verdadera obra que transcurre amarrada en un mismo punto de búsqueda interior. La ridiculez del ser humano no es más que la expresión de lo que hay dentro de cada uno y los intentos por aprenden a manejar los errores.
I couldn't even wrap my head around this film. I only liked the music and how the camera was like always following and never off
A weird, self-indulgent show that correctly and accurately portrays the vanity of humanities/arts/actor types.
The fantastic cinematography that propels the narrative forward creates a marvellous cinematic experience; I felt like I was watching a play that was constructed on an impossibly epic scale. The film provides a fluid blend of satirical comedy and drama due to its roaringly original screenplay and the heartfelt, manic and skillful performances of the entire cast. Birdman left me grinning like an idiot as the credits hit the screen to the final, energetic beats of its fantastic score. A satisfyingly bizarre portrait of the monsters that emerge out of the many facets of fame... a deftly-directed miracle with masterpiece written all over it... the greatest film of 2014.
Prepare to be blown away by Birdman, a sometimes scathing satire of Hollywood's ups and downs from an actor's POV. Academy members, especially the actor's branch, are bound to love it, and audiences will as well. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, director of Oscar nominated downers like 21 Grams and Best Picture 2006 contender Babel - two films I loved - achieves a masterpiece with his latest creation. Inarritu is in Robert Altman territory here making mock of Hollywood avarice and actor's neuroses. And he gives Michael Keaton the comeback performance he so richly deserves. Keaton is phenomenal as Riggin Thomas, tortured by his professional and personal past and present: a broken marriage, failure as a parent, career suicide and financial calamity. And now as he sinks his life savings into a play, he has to deal with Edward Norton, a pretentious Broadway star who never sold out to play a super-hero and wants to get busy with Riggan's daughter played by Emma Stone. Stone is the best she's ever been, leaving her usual light-hearted effervescence behind to play the cold, betrayed Sam. Norton is on fire, the best he's been in a decade. Truly Birdman is an acting tour de force from the whole cast. The script by a cadre of Inarritu teammates, some of whom worked on his 2010 Best Foreign Language Film nominee Biutiful - have carved out the best script of its kind since Shakespeare in Love. Gutsy to stick Hollywood's own success in its face and bemoan the loss of art to commerce. We here lines like Popularity is the slutty little cousin of prestige and People, they love blood, they love action. Not this talky, depressing, philosophical bullshit. And the jabs at the likes of Michael Fassbender, Robert Downey Jr. and all the current caped crusaders are fast and furious. I have to admit I love the blood and the action AND the depressing, philosophical bullshit too. I saw Interstellar and Birdman in the same weekend - two films at creative odds with each other - and experienced two of the very best films of the year. So there is a reason to love Hollywood and art after all. Birdman will be an across the board Oscar contender this year. Not to be missed.
Cinematography alone this movie is incredibly inventive. Great directing, great cast, and a fresh and unique storyline. Not to mention Michael Keaton delivers a career defining performance. Edward Norton deserves his due credit for a strong performance as well. The ending was well suited, and the intelligent script and execution allows for engaged discovery of underlying themes and messages. Deserved the Oscar for best picture.
No solo me aburrió sino que creo que ni la entendí jaja.. se ve que no entendi xq le gustó al 80% de la gente :P
Intelligent, intense, absorbing movie.The story of a washed-up actor, Riggan (played by Michael Keaton), who gets a last chance at fame and immortality. He adapts a Raymond Carver novel into a play and directs and stars in it on Broadway. The movie shows the roller-coaster ride that is his mind, plus the behind-the-scenes goings on of the play.Certainly not your average movie. The blurring of the lines between reality and fantasy, as the lead character veers constantly between delusion and actuality, is incredibly intriguing and not a little disconcerting (and this is not necessarily a bad thing). The plot is simultaneously simple and complex - simple main structure but very complex in the intricacies. Ultimately it is a character-driven movie, and the characters are well-developed and complex.On that note, it is not all about Riggan. There are some sub-plots involving his daughter, Sam (played by Emma Stone) plus other cast members. These non-Riggan moments provide for respite from the intensity of Riggan and his issues, and are a welcome relief.While it is the script and direction that set up the movie, it is the performances that complete it - casting is spot-on and the cast act of their skins. Superb performance by Michael Keaton in the lead role - he well deserved his Best Actor Oscar nomination. Good support from Emma Stone, Edward Norton, Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough and Amy Ryan. Stone and Norton are excellent and got Supporting Actress/Actor Oscar nominations.Even Zach Galifianakis, better known as a comedy actor, is solid in his role. This movie well deserved its 2015 Best Picture Oscar.
Someone tell me this gets better after minute 10
I like this movie, but I want to love it. I would if it were more consistent. Without spoiling anything, the ending would be a lot more palatable had the film in its entirety been shown completely from Michael Keaton's character's perspective.
Amazing movie. Keaton was sublime in it.
Wow, this was the bets film I've seen in years. Stand out performances from Keaton, Galifinakis, Riseborough and Norton.
With technical and storytelling prowess, Birdman is an accurate commentary on the entertainment industry, and it's also a great story on its own. The entire cast is fantastic, but most of all Keaton in the role of an aged actor that wants to remain in the spotlight.
Good depiction of how self hate drives ego but not Oscar worthy.
The cinematography is amazing and the acting all around is phenomenal.
the more i think about this film as time goes,the more i really appreciate this films message. Starting with the great story of an actor who had played a superhero in the late 1980s to the early 1990s now has become a household name known as Birdman. The movie centralizes on the actor named Riggan, who is played by Micheal Keaton on trying to change his image on not how people see him but how he sees himself as well as struggling with his confidence. The movies narrative is straight forward but its delivery is truly stunning mostly due to the cinematography making all the scenes look like one shot. that being said what it shows are standout performances from the cast, especially from Keaton. Now there are arrangements being made about how this movie is pretty much his life, i would say it is very similar but not entirely accurate. The movie focuses more on the psyche of actors and actresses for the same reason Keaton's character Riggan are working towards. Some of the characters we sympathize with in terms of their mental well being, some of characters we disregard for their actions for why they act but this is definitely Riggans story of a person who questions his actions to hopefully deal with his demons. He is consistently having a hard time to keep his demons at bay while also dealing with his family(mostly his daughter played by Emma Stone) and the play. The movie really punches the audience in the face on how movies are just being cash grabs blockbusters and not a lot of creatively is being put into the movies. It really hits audiences and critics on the idea that they demand a lot from actors but are never satisfied. Taking in the perspective that everyone just labels everything and doesn't think about the creative process it took to make a play or film. The message only strengthens the movie story giving it a greater impact to where we get a greater sense of reliability between Riggan and the viewer. i suppose with Michael leading this story it certainly does help the film have a genuine approach and i can understand the arguments being made. With Michael Keaton performance though it is certainly the driving force and i don't believe it would have worked with any other actor due how believable it is. Overall this movie has a great message and its story is really spot on. A well deserved praise for Micheal Keaton showing weakness and humility throughout the films narrative as well as captivating an actors integrity making it feel like a unique experience. Come Oscar season I wouldn't mind if won at all.
Ed Norton is very good.
Celebrating the degradation and misery of humanity.
4.8/5 PROS michael keaton returnsfantastic ensemble cast amazing that its film all in 1 or 2 shots ending made you think extremely funny
I'd like to win an oscar. Please! I ticked all the boxes! Cool camera angles, though.
I respected this movie for what it was, had superb acting especially from Michael Keaton and the rest of the cast, it was great that they managed to pull off a mostly one take movie one we haven't seen in a while but for me the movie just dragged I can see how someone would enjoy it but I respected it more that anything else.
This acclaimed film is a bizarre and unique work. Great credit goes to director Alejandro González Iñárritu who really put together an altogether new type of film to tell a dark comedic narrative. Michael Keaton being cast as Riggan Thompson was inspired, who could possible connect closer to this role than the man who played Batman twice? describing the real nature of the film and its appeal, one has to recognize who the TRUE audience of this film is. No question about it, this is a film for actors and people in the entertainment industry. The average person who doesn't act on stage or film can get a glimpse at some of the narcissistic traits of the principles in this film, but it isn't really a film for everyone. It has a lot of great parts to it, but what the film fails to do is truly set up a protagonist you really want to root for. Ed Norton plays a character who is both scene stealing and undeniably unlikeable. But each of the principle performers are given an opportunity to shine. Emma Stone, Naomi Watts, Norton, Keaton, even Galifianakis, they all have very great scenes to show their tremendous skill. The film asks a few industry questions to stew on, like the conflict between the art and the celebrity. Understandably such a film was well received in its industry. But film maker navel gazing doesn't necessarily resonate with the average person. The film is a solid R film, not family entertainment. As a dark comedy it is not laugh out loud funny, but still a solid work worthy of some acclaim. A singular piece, I doubt you'll see another film like it.
Michael Keaton, Batman Returns
Interesting and well done film. Not one I would be in a rush to go back and watch.
While watching Birdman two things kept coming to mind. One is that this reminded me of a quirkier version of Black Swan, replacing Ballet with Theater. The second was Michael Keaton was both simultaneously brilliant and distracting, the whole time I kept seeing Michael Keaton playing a caricature of himself. I enjoyed Birdman it had a lot of great elements I loved the continuous camera with no cuts to make it feel as if you were watching a play. I thought the performances were great especially Ed Norton, and Zach Galifanakis. Perhaps my favorite parts of the movie were Batman voice though I guess in this case it is Birdman voice that is in the head of Keaton. Overall a great movie.
Excessively self-indulgent and pretentious at times but made up of troubled brilliant performances.
Great character development, funny, and thought provoking. Perhaps a bit weird.
This movie had a lot going for it. It had some great acting and a unique way it was shot. But it didn't really all come together for me until the last half hour, I had trouble engaging during the middle of the movie. The ending was pretty good, the beginning was pretty good, a lot of things were pretty good, but it seemed like it could have been better.
Birdman is definitely gimmicky, drawn out and oscar bait..... but its very well made and has some very cool scenes and all its technical goodness. It really felt like they built up a whole lot of stuff but didn't go anywhere with it. It kind of dwindled a little til it ended
Worst soundtrack ever! Horrible movie with great actors. Boo Hollywood and boo Broadway. This was a reacharound for both parties. I hope everyone came and then left...for good.
This movie was SOOOOOO bad. Don't know why so many people liked it. I do like Michael Keaton, but not in this!!!
This film was perhaps the worst movie I have ever seen. I enjoyed watching 'The Room' more than this steaming pile of poo.
This is 2 hours of your life you won't get back. It's basically about a has been actor trying to make a play work in broadway. He has psychotic episodes thinking he really is birdman with magical powers. He has ups and downs and I appreciate that actors may think this is real behind the scenes, which may be the case, but this is unappealing to joe blogs on the street. Finally when things do go good, he knocks himself back down. I don't see the point of this film and I am sorry but I just do not get it. 1/2 star for the acting, I would give it zero overall if I could. Original, but not good!
Birdman is incomprehensively brilliant, full of incredible acting and some of the most insane yet gripping plot devices offered from an original show in a long time, finding reasons to dislike this film will take much effort.
I can definitely see the metaphorical content, but it's just too weird. Was I supposed to laugh as an intoxicated actor attempted to fornicate with an actress while onstage, only to stumble out of bed with a raging hadron? It didn't really click for me. Exceptional acting tho
Pretentious and dull. The drum score was one of the more annoying things I've heard in a film. I hated almost everything about it. (First and only viewing - 6/3/2015)
Very entertaining performances by a well chosen cast, really enjoyed the idea of the story and much of the writing, but disliked the fantasy/dream-like sequences and Birdman thought's going through the main character\s head; I thought they were too cheesy, weren't really needed and the film could have been better without it. The whole one shot cinematography is something I've wanted to do myself for years and it was well done and really kept the energy up throughout the 2 hour film.
The first thing I noticed in this film, is the one-take camera shot the entire time. Which is pretty unique and engaging. Director Inarritu wants to prove the involvement of the movie through the eyes of the audience. And impressive editing right there. Secondly, the characterization, it's not just the personality of each character, but also the in-depth look of each other's life. You noticed, how good they are in this film. Michael Keaton (Riggan) as the protagonist, he is seriously impressive here. He's having this wild imagination with an imaginary friend like he is bothered nor struggled at times, and he wants to prove, he's not just a celebrity, but a stage actor. He wants to prove how he's good at it. Edward Norton as Mike, he is more of an asshole, like he does that for the better. I really dig Emma Stone's performance in here, and she feels for it. And special mention to Zack. I mean, I never though he can do one of these roles. He is a smart-assy type of lawyer and he's good at it. This is a well scripted, and with brilliant performances. It tells how us, not just the actors, but the everyday people. How do we handle the pressure like these. The sense of urgency. By not being mentally incompetent about anything. But to love about what have. Be passionate. 4.5/5
This is a tour de force film on so many levels. The acting is superb all around the board and the directing is just phenomenal. While a film like Boyhood is something you'll never see again, I'd argue Birdman is a similar once in a lifetime film. Gonzalez's directing is simply breathtaking, as he delivers a film that's a play within a movie within a play. That may sound complicated, and for the first twenty or so minutes of the film while you're getting your bearings it is, however, once you see how the film is broken up into these collections of long, no cut, one take shots, as the camera swoops through the backstage of a Broadway set, you find yourself in awe at the sheer brilliance of it. I would definitely recommend Birdman for anyone who truly enjoys film-acting, directing, dialogue, etcetera. Along with Boyhood and Whiplash, Birdman is one of the top films of 2014 and beyond. It's dark, entertaining, funny, and most often brilliant.
Sassy performances. Great banter. She really is
Creative on nearly every level, Birdman?s unique take on some otherwise time-worn ideas is refreshingly jarring and well-characterized by all its performers all orchestrated by Alejandro González Iñárritu?s inventive direction.
One of the weirdest movies I have ever seen. The basic premise of the movie is that Michael Keaton is a washed-up superhero movie star from the '90s who is directing and acting in a Broadway play in order to become relevant again. Oddly enough, he seems to actually have some kind of telekinetic and levitation powers, though whether these are real or a figment of his delusions is left for the audience to figure out. Emma Stone does a decent job as his daughter, and Ed Norton is his usual tempestuous self. There's a bunch of modern bits of nonsense tacked on in the form of Twitter and going viral and so forth, and it wouldn't be a movie from the 2010s without some random lesbian action going on to satisfy our current day version of the token minority. I did like how there were no cuts at all in the movie; it's all done with one camera that follows everyone around, kind of like Cloverfield but without the shakiness. The story itself is alright, and has something to say about modern culture and the divide between movie and stage acting, but this is weighed down by the bizarre new-age fantasy segments of Michael Keaton flying around and generally going insane. Overall, it's hard to understand why this won Best Picture at the Oscars, but I guess if you're into indie film techniques and barebones social commentary, this is the one for you.
A thrilling leap forward for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, Birdman is an ambitious technical showcase powered by a layered story and outstanding performances from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton.
Incredibly overrated. So the cinematography was groundbreaking. So what?
Weird for sure. But definitely entertaining. Galifianakis in a non-goofy serious-ish role threw me off (in a good way)! Edward Norton's performance is the highlight.
Sometimes the gangster life is unavoidable in business, no matter how hard one tries to avoid it and keep going on a straight and narrow pace. Whether one wants to admit it or not, you have to get your hands dirty every once in a while. A Most Violent Year goes over those tough life and death decisions with aplomb with an engrossing character study of a business man who does all he can to not play dirty when things get tough. Set in the winter of 1981, New York City is statistically experiencing the most violent year in the city's history. Crime is rampant and everyone is looking to get their piece of the pie in search of that elusive American dream. Abel Morales (Oscar Isaac) is a Latino immigrant who is a self-made man who worked up from a driver at an oil company to be the boss of the operation. He is quickly rising up the ranks in the oil business and is about to become bigger when he makes a deal for riverside property that would grow his business exponentially and give him a stranglehold on the market. Aided by his trustful lawyer Andrew Walsh (Albert Brooks), He seeks to do business legally and won't resort to tactics that threaten his workers or himself. Things seem to be going well but troubles arise when competing oil companies stick up his drivers and steal his product and persistent DA Lawrence (David Oyelowo) is breathing down his neck for numerous illegal business practices that threaten to derail his life as well as business. To further add to his conflict is his wife Anna (Jessica Chastain), the daughter of a gangster who Abel bought the business from, who tasks him in taking a more take charge attitude and bite back. With so much added pressure, he rushes to clear the deal and take his business to the next level.This isn't your average or regular gangster drama, which may upset some but I found it to be enthralling and captivating with a couple of great performances. Isaac is one of the standouts and adds another dynamic role to his already impressive resume. Taking hints from a past gangster like Michael Corleone in The Godfather, not only in character but slicked back hair and some gorgeous coats, he is thrown into the world of crime and is unsure how to react. Michael eventually becomes a cold blooded kingpin of the criminal underworld while it's a more virtuous journey for Abel who wants to hold onto his code of honor and duty. Seeing him wade through the waters of good and evil is an entertaining exploit to what man will do to ensure the safety of his business and family. You become invested in what happens to him and what he is willing to do to make sure that he won't get pushed around anymore by those that deem him weak. Isaac has a quiet and serious mentality that is often set in stone but will diminish if the pressure is put on him. He exudes a cool confidence and an imposing front that would feel right at home in a violent gangster epic by Scorsese but in a cut throat business of heating oil, it still feels right at home. The change in background doesn't make the world any less thrilling or entertaining. If Isaac doesn't take at least one serious gangster film, I would be incredibly surprised. He has a great presence and control over his character that you could potentially see him blow up at any moment. There is much intensity in his eyes that you could practically see his blood boiling, leaving you waiting if he will give in to his violent urges. Tough and rough edged, he doesn't take things lying down, even if it never resorts to violence, and he eventually takes matters into his own hands when he won't put up with his product getting stolen any longer. But he is by no means innocent as he has been doing the same duplicitous business dealings as his competitors have done but not in a way of outright stealing from one another and threating workers lives. Doing so, it makes an interesting dynamic where you root for him somewhat while at the same time see that he was never all the way clean to begin with. Making up his better half is Chastain's amazing performance as the dutiful gangster's daughter but not necessarily the gangster's wife. She is very well connected with her family being key members of the criminal underworld that clearly influenced her character and how she does business. Abel wanting to do business his way stops her the moment she mentions her notorious family to offer him some much needed help. Whip smart and in control, she is in charge of the books for the company and proves to be incredibly valuable later on. She practically steals every scene she is in and commandeers the ship or attempts to when things get out of hand. Chastain made it very easy to be enthralled by her as she attempts to woo Abel to the dark side of business and give in to his inner gangster. She has an impressive presence that makes the complete image of her rather appealing. Her beauty matched with her no nonsense ideals makes for an amazing character that no one would dare mess with. She simply talks the talk and walks the walk, daring anybody else to stand toe to toe with her. This makes the chemistry between Isaac and Chastain crackling with tension and emotion where you can't help but stick onto every word. The repoire they show was incredibly engaging, with neither one willing to let up it made for some great drama and interactions. Brooks was good too in a small but important role as his lawyer. He is also more inclined to go into the gangster way of doing things, trying to guide Abel in that direction too. He considers arming the drivers with pistols to counteract the hijackings but Abel argues it could prove to be more trouble than its worth. Being a comedian for much of his career, he makes for great imposing authority figures in crime dramas with his performance as a gangster in Drive being one of his best roles and he fits the role like a glove.J.C. Chandor is one of the more promising directors and writers, sporting a small number of films but are all nevertheless impressive. He has a great knack for character driven films and tense moments wrought with heavy dialogue. Even though All Is Lost is basically devoid of any dialogue but it is still thrilling and captivating. He presents people who aren't perfect and puts their morality under a magnifying glass with much of the characters in the financial drama Margin Call fitting that model. It's not surprising that he got an Oscar nomination for best screenplay for Margin Call. While not full of the gun battles, explosions, car chases and gratuitous violence that is permanent in various gangster films, it instead takes a restrained approach to things. Although there was an effective and exciting car chase that later led to a foot chase that really got you in. I really liked how he went about putting a normal business like oil and heating and placing it against a mob type setting. The interactions that the characters have with one another makes for an interesting dynamic when you realize that these guys aren't cold blooded killers, just guys who want the edge on their competition. It's a slow burner where the characters are allowed to simmer where it makes it hard to guess where their emotions will take them. The dialogue is rich with intensity where you don't really expect it too. Chastain has such a great way of speaking that's threatening and condescending and she just takes everything head on. The back and forth interactions between everyone was a joy to listen to and made it much more rich and developed. The scene where Abel is coaching his new recruits how to take charge of their customers was wrought with intensity and takes it up a notch when he talks down to an employee who laughs at the all too wrong moment. If it were a true gangster movie, you would have expected the boss to level him with a baseball bat like Al Capone in The Untouchables. That's how effective A Most Violent year is in that it perfectly copies what we expect from gangster films and transports them to another movie and setting where the central character is doing all that he can to not be a gangster. It feels like a 70s throwback crime drama where action wasn't the central piece of entertainment and the dialogue and complex characters dominate the screen. It ended on somewhat of a happy note but in a direction that begets an interesting scenario for all involved. It's a little ambiguous but it becomes a little clearer when you notice the previous moments in the film.Films like A Most Violent Year can be hard to peg sometimes. There isn't much violence or bare knuckle action like many expected, but a film shouldn't always contain everything that it's about in the title. Sometimes I enjoy a slow burning drama that just captivates you with dialogue and story that unwanted action would have weighed it down and mad the film worthless in the end. If one puts in the time and doesn't expect a Scorsese film, you will come out the other end with a gem. A little too talky for some with not much of the payoff one may expect, it still has plenty of thrills with a pair of amazing performances that dominate the screen. The payoff that some may want wouldn't have made it a better film necessarily. But going the route it went leaves it with an air of ambiguity that says more than going a more pedestrian route would. Four stolen gas tankers by gunpoint out of five.
On the surface there's a sense of petty egotism to the Michael Keaton character's motivations, of feeling more important and entitled than those around him. I myself felt this tied into a more universal theme though, one of a man trying to control his legacy and his impact on the world around him, make his time on earth mean something if only just to him. There's a blurring of the line between fantasy and reality on a couple levels, perhaps meant as a commentary on how the former can impact the latter. In the role of an obsessive, self important actor, Ed Norton personifies a certain kind of personality to comedic extremes, someone focused on his work to where hostility and aggression become totally impersonal tools of the trade. Emma Stone's cynical blogger rang as a touch two dimensional, but at the same time there was a humanity to how her upbringing pushed her in this direction. Other thematic focuses seemed to be on a sort of a pull between devotion to one's art, and the personal havoc in wreaked on ones life, and the conflict between Keaton and Norton does seem to bring up whether a work is a product of the director or a collaborative effort. Stylistically there was a kind of 70s movie inspired tone mixed with modern surrealism. I'm not exactly sure on what cutting the film to look like a single continuous shot was meant to achieve, perhaps to create a sense of the elements of the characters' lives and fantasies blending together. At any rate, it meshed well with the style of the movie. In some ways, it felt like some of the cynicism running through the film was an excuse for covering up insecurities about the screenplay, that cliches could be evoked ironically to avoid accountability.
Super unique, best dark comedy i've seen in awhile. Quite a few surreal and jutting moments, but for the most part stay in line with the movie.
In technical term, it is good but the film itself is just average. Maybe I am not quite familiar with the Broadways.
weird but totally amazing!!!
A boring, pretentious, lifeless, pointless movie, whose only redeeming factors are the awesome Edward Norton & the brilliant cinematography.
One of my favorite movies ever! So deserving of the Best Picture win. The Screenplay was brilliant. This movie has some of the best cinematography I've ever seen. It looked like it was filmed all in one shot.
Brilliant! The most original film I've seenSince pulp fiction.
The movie has a good story line, an interesting story, a good video capturing and the liked the movie altogether.
In no way Oscar worthy
Overrated by the industry makers. Not even 3 star movie
Unsettling, Technically great, hits you in the right places at the right time
I hate movies that depict New Yorkers as spoiled, neurotic brats starving for attention and Birdman is all that and more. Despite great performances, especially from Edward Norton, this movie sinks under its own weight. The jazz percussion soundtrack is pretty good but the ending is just silly. How this won an Oscar I'll never know.
The acting in this is off the charts. Movies about movies are always great
This excellent original movie staring Michael Keaton (Batman 1989), has been nominated for an Academy Award. I was captivated by this film which gives the impression, it was done in one continuous take. Adults only 9/10 Rev 197
Best Long Take in the world
The camera work is incredible and the performances by Keaton and Norton are great. But the story opened too many subplots that they did not finish.
Fascinating on a technical level (shot and edited to look like one continuous take) and brave for including a jazz drum soundtrack over almost the entire film. Great performances from all, let down somewhat by a flimsy story and the bolted on fantasy /existential imaginings of Keatons lead character, with no reference points to anchor them. Despite these shortcomings a very enjoyable watch
Awesome direction.. And Michael Keaton did it again!
May just be the most original and well-written movie of the year. Inarritu creates a masterpiece that is as hilarious as it is thought-provoking. Keaton seems as if he were born to play this insightful role of a former superhero-actor, who is desperate to feel relevant. There is also fantastic supporting performances from Stone, Norton, and Watts. But the film itself has ingenious commentary about how everyone yearns to have purpose in the world and what people find entertaining in this day and age. And it is shot perfectly, with immaculate cinematography.
A very ambitious movie that hits on many levels, overall a very odd film that takes patience on watching. The cast is superb, absolutely brilliant. The shooting style, a seemingly continuous nearly 2 hour shot, also absolutely brilliant. Just about everything about this movie is odd and original, from the style to the music. Too odd at times, actually, for me personally to give this a better review. This is a deserving Oscar winning film, nonetheless.
Weird film. Hard to follow.
It could have been way better but Michael Keaton is amazing as always and Emma stone adds an interesting dynamic to the movie Edward Norton is Edward Norton as always with an awesome display of wit and sarcasm
Beautifully directed by Gonzalez and wonderfully lead by Keaton, Birdman is an ultra-bleak, yet intriguing look at selfishness and the need for purpose.
Good acting. Interesting concept. The flow wore thin after a while and you started to wish for a change of scene.
Narratively flawless and technically audacious, Birdman is an honest explanation of career desperation, shown with excellence in Michael Keaton's captivating role as an actor who wants to soar above mediocrity by financing a Broadway play.
I'm glad it won for best movie. It was a very well rounded movie. The cinematography was excellent. I really enjoyed it.
Bogged down a bit in the second half but easy to see why this garnered the praise it did. Keaton and Norton were both phenomenal.
Michael Keaton, Edward Norton and Emma Stone were outstanding; the fine performances elevated this film, which, in other hands, could have been merely pretentious. Not a feel good film by any means, but moving and certainly displays Keaton's depth.
Birdman is a fascinatingly multi layered tragicomedy which delves into the human psychology and our constant need for love, admiration and relevance. It also serves as an incredible comeback for Michael Keaton, whose turn as a fictionalised version of himself is a definite career high point.
This is Pulp Fiction meet Smash! So if you liked pulp fiction and you'd like to mix it with only the dark side of the TV show Smash totally, this show will leave you absolutely puking in the isles. How the hell did this piece of (expletive deleted) rate any awards at all.
I absolutely loved this film. It's very unique, creative and downright insane. Basically, it's an independent showbiz dramedy with social satire and some blockbuster elements.It's uniquely shot. The film is mostly done in one continuous shot, though there are some transitions throughout the film, and it's quite impressive how it was done. It also has very neat visuals.For instance, we have this small indie film made on a small budget and it's very impressive how the blockbuster aspect was done.The story is original. We have this actor famous for playing a superhero in a movie franchise and is performing in this play. It also has the feel of a superhero film in that the protagonist can move stuff around and has these visions where his environment is like a superhero flick. It also plays out like the real world as it references recent Blockbuster films.The acting is great. It has brilliant performances from Michael Keaton, Edward Norton and Emma Stone. During the parts where the characters are performing in a play, the actors and actresses make it very believable.Overall, this was a very impressive film and I think it deserved that best picture Oscar. There is not a single thing that I did not like about this film.If you expect a superhero flick, you'll probably be disappointed. But if you are interested in film and/or just want something different from the usual Hollywood stuff, it would not be a bad idea giving Birdman a watch. I highly recommend it.
The first half of it is stunning. However, as I get older I have a lot to deal with in my life, when I watch a movie I don't want to have to figure it out what the director and writers are trying to tell us philosophically. Maybe 10 years Ago I was like that but Now I just want to watch a movie and not think too much about it afterwords. Was it a good movie? I'm not sure let me get back with you while I think about my life. That is about what the ending says in a nutshell without giving too much away.
So bad I had to turn it off
Pretty good movie but in some ways expected more with its talented cast and countless awards. Nevertheless, very enjoyable.
bad to the point that I feel a moral obligation to warn all friends/family
Really great. Much more intense than any comedy I've seen (I wouldn't call it a comedy but the golden globes do so...)
Not what I was expecting when I went to the theater. This was a hilarious, moving and engaging piece of cinema. The performances were stellar, and the direction and cinematography were truly works of art
I would rather be water boarded than have to sit through this dribble again. Bad bad bad.
Despite the title, this is not a superhero film really. What it is, is an incredibly well done character study of a washed up actor trying to regain the limelight. The unique camerawork really serves the story as well. Definitely one to check out.
An interesting film... Lots to think about, but at the same time - not much to think about. The cinematography and editing was so good it was borderline annoying - I often found myself just watching to see where Alejandro Gonzalez would make his cuts rather than paying attention to the story (for that, minus 0.5 star). I can't even imagine the amount of time and practice it took to pull off some of the shots they did. Also, way too much mirror work - crazy. The actors... All brilliant. All.
Well acted and produced, but the story feels very familiar, despite the critics' ravings about originality.
See this, see this now. Acting, cinematography, music, writing... This movie is the best bunch of strong pieces I have seen in a long time. There is no weakness here. Does the sum become greater than the parts? No. But the parts are so, SO strong.
I love Michael Keaton and Edward Norton but just couldn't get into this.
Exemplar of accomplished vision.
Incredible and mindbogglingly skillful in its execution.
One of those films where you really can't understand why people seemed to like it.
The movie equivalent of Yngwie Malmsteen.
best movie in 2014, brilliant director and marvelous cast!
It's a good black comedy that is technically brilliant and thought provoking with its layered plot.
This film gets 4 stars for the technical feats I'm sure are involved in the stunningly interesting long shots taken for each scene. However, insular feel of the plot - its apparent pat on the back for actors who brave the cruel, hard task of maintaining a balance between their art and selling out to the masses gets 1 star. Birdman is a conceited, insular commentary on the life of an actor with a seriously unchecked mental illness making it big who later has to find ways to cope with the realities of mortality and legacy. I had high hopes for this film as a fan of much of the cast's and director's previous work. A serious disappointment for me as a filmgoer and a tremendous shock for me when this film won Best Picture at the Oscars. In a way, I'm probably feeding into the main points of the film about the nature of criticizing someone's Art. But, I'm only a consumer and I like what I like. Best Cinematography for Birdman? Heck yeah. Birdman as Best Film? H*ll no.
good movie with stellar performances by Keaton and Norton. besides the acting this movie is nowhere near the masterpiece it's been made out to be
Equally inventive, humorous, well-acted, as well as intelligent, but also slightly pretentious and a bit gimmicky, Birdman is an interesting film. It's a film that serves to pulverize or ingratiate with its quirkiness or originality, depending on how one interprets it. It's a black comedy, a character study, and perhaps a tragedy. Above all, it's memorable.The film follows a washed-up former blockbuster star as he endeavors to prove his dramatic talent by putting on a Broadway play. Along the way he must contend not only with the nightmare logistics, but also his alter-ego, who continually questions his decisions and worth.The script was sharp and offered a lot of higher brow humor mixed in with some witty dialogue. It was stylized in parts, though not overly so for most of its run. The narrative was kept largely focused, and we are totally transformed in to the film's world. We get a unique view of not only the theater system, but also an insightful commentary on us, the viewing public, and our narcissistic, attention obsessed society.The performances have been rightly lauded, with Michael Keaton being nothing short of brilliant. The entire cast is in fact exceptional, with Edward Norton bringing a lot of self-parody and charm to his role. The direction keeps the film running briskly; it's always engaging, and never dry. If there's criticism to be had, one would have to say that the third act gets overly indulgent. His other persona becomes more of a distraction than an actual service to the narrative and the realism is sacrificed. The ending note is also unduly ambiguous and pretentious.Overall, well worth a watch.4/5 Stars
Acting was superb! Writing was very catchy.
Strange and funny but also a film with some meaning to it.
I am convinced that critics will love any movie or play that is about being in a movie or play. That or Hollywood in general. This felt no different. Actually it felt like I was watching A Prairie Home Companion with all the shots wandering around the theater. Is it really about a superhero or about an actor overcoming being a superhero? I don't think so. Its about putting together a play and struggles that are probably often associated with it. Not really jumping into fresh material with that, but the cast is nice and the superhero aspect does play well with current trends.
Self indigent rubbish
Forget about Battlefield Earth, Inchon and Attack of the Killer Tomatoes. Birdman is the worst movie ever made. As the English might put it, this movie is totally up its own arse. One of the critiques of Post-Modern Architecture was titled Private Jokes in Public Places. This King has absolutely no clothing at all. Yes, 93% of film critics can be wrong, very wrong.
A very uniquely made movie it seems the camera never cuts, a really good movie very intriguing, great cast, nice score and nice direction. A must see.
Reviewers go ga-ga lately over movies with no ending and lots of angst. Boring. This is not a 'black comedy'. There is not a chuckle to be had in this depressing film. I don't know why people keep calling it that.
Great performance by Keaton but that's pretty much it
Brilliant, seamless directing style with outstanding performances.
One of the best movie experiences I've had in years. Thought-provoking on so many levels, superbly acted, superbly directed (it feels like one whole take) and my eyes were glued to the screen from start to finish. I don't understand why people come to see movies if you don't like or appreciate Birdman. Alejandro Gonzàlez is so talented it blows my mind. He uses filmmaking as an art form and uses it to stimulate thoughts and emotions which would not be able just through words. There isn't a single bad thing that pops to my mind when watching this movie. It's a masterpiece.
I gotta give it props for the cool filmography, I felt like Norton may have stolen a bit of the show. Did not like Stone's acting job with this one.
It is rather amusing that Birdman won the Academy for best film, because it definitely isn't the kind of film you'll see at the Oscars, for better and/or worse.It is, however, engaging(if you're not looking for steroid blockbusters, that is), funny and insightful as far as showbiz is concerned.Innaritu's surreal/magic realism insertions work not necessarily because they are easily explained by the plot, but because, even without this aspect, they work as references/throwbacks or ironies. The performances are accurate and there are some juicy characters(Mike is the chief among them) and - if you're into cinema or theater - the experience might be even more rewarding.As I said before, it is interesting that Birdman grabbed the Academy Award for the best film. Interesting and funny. Because, in general, Oscars are for crowd-pleasers. I'm not suggesting that the Oscar films are bad, I'm suggesting just that, in general, are audience friendly.Birdman isn't. Yes, it stars Michael Keaton and Edward Norton, but it isn't audience-friendly. And those of you who try to make it like this, please stop, because it's ridiculous.But is it Oscar worthy? Couldn't tell. Haven't seen the rest of the nominated films . But could an less audience-friendly film grab an oscar? Should it? Of course! If it deserves it, yes.Now, many people are living or feeding the delusion that the quality of a film is determined by how many people like it and if you and most of your didn't like a film, that film is bad. Nope, it doesn't work like that, I'm afraid. Cinema is not a big Miss Popularity contest. There are certain criteria to be followed and none of them imply the fact that a certain film bored you, or you just didn't like it, or it doesn't make sense/it isn't interesting. These are not criteria, these are irrelevant things people gossip about while shopping or eating. Amusingly enough, the film kinda revolves around what I said earlier, as well. For being rather engaging, funny, well acted and well crafted, I give this 4 out of 5.
Terrible watch never get those 2 hours back
One of my favorite movies of all time! (*^_^*)
For starters, it is an ambitious piece of art from the writing, the camera work, and the direction. As a whole, it is dense with double meanings, wrapped in clues, and coated with technical creativity. From the wonderfully insightful (full) title to the unique and strangely fitting film techniques, everything that the group tried seemed to work seamlessly. Norton and Stone work some wonderful magic in support, but Michael Keaton steals this. It is intriguingly his life we are seeing portrayed, and yet I later found out that it wasn't even written with him in mind! His full arsenal is on display and commands your full attention. One of the most exciting and masterful movies in a long time.
Keaton plays Riggan Thompson, a former Hollywood actor, best known for playing the role of a superhero known as Birdman in three blockbuster movies. His career suffering since he turned down a forth film. Thompson seeks to recapture his fame by making it as a theater actor. Throughout the film he has to deal with his co-star, his rebellious daughter, and Birdman himself, who symbolizes his self-doubt. Only real criticisms being I felt the critic played by Lindsey Duncan was a little too strong. Though I agree everyone has their personal tastes when it comes to acting, to wanna kill a play simply because the lead actor is known for playing a superhero seems rather unprofessional. Also the I felt the scenes between Stone and Norton seemed unnecessary. But overall, these are minor criticisms. Admittedly the theme of the film is a bit difficult for me. One possible theme is life imitates art shown in such scenes when Keaton's character seems to gain super powers. Though it seems to be more of a symbol of his character going mad. Another theme is just wanting to be loved. This is supported by the fact the films lead wishes to regain his former popularity, and repair his relationship with his daughter. Hence the play What We Talk About When We Talk About Love. Birdman draws you in with it's visual style. As the film is shot, for the most part, to look like it's all one take. This was done to give the film the feel of watching a theater play. It's a very unique style that draws people in and immerses them in the films story.  In conclusion, Birdman is a very odd, but unique film, with a deep story, and fantastic performances. The only real disappointment I can think of, is for people expecting a superhero film about Birdman.
I didn't love the ending. Not really sure what it was trying to say, but I loved it until then. I great deconstruction of how our own pride and psyche can override and destroy us. With great criticism of modern day movies and theater snobbery.
Yessir!!!! ACTING!!!
Utter rubbish. One good scene in the whole film. Can't beleive it was reviewed so well.
Outstanding performance from Keaton, Norton and Stone. Overall interesting yet odd. Definitely needs to be watched a few times.
Is this film Oscar bait? Absolutely, should it or does that take anything away from this film? Absolutely not. This is the type of film that one waits for all year and it embodies the true art of film. This is a masterpiece from beginning to end and from the opening scene you are enthralled with this story and not for one second can u take your eyes away from the screen. From its extremely strong plot and its intriguing social narrative about Hollywood and the state of movie making today. Also the way this movie is shot truly is a sight to see and a true achievement in cinema. From about two minutes in to the last 2 minutes of the film it is made to look like it never cuts and it is just one long shot. This was masterfully done by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and puts him seriously in contention for an Oscar this year. Above all of this one really keeps this story so entertaining and this film so great is the remarkable performances from all the actors involved. Michael Keaton gives maybe the performance of his career and will likely win him and Oscar. Emma Stone gives a very powerful performance along with Naomi Watts. In my personal opinion though Ed Norton has the strongest performance in this movie and steals every scene he is a part of. Another surprise performance in this film though is Zach Galifianakis who goes a turn for the dramatic and gives the best performance of his career. The only real complaint I have about this film is that the end left me a little cold and I think that it should have ended a little earlier than it did. Other than that I do not have anything bad to say about this movie it is a great film that I can honestly say is an experience and an experience worth having in the theater at that. 4.5/5
While I feel that Birdman loses a bit of steam as it barrels toward the credits, it does offer more highlights than fails. Keaton is top-notch, the camera work is energetic & the story is fascinating and original. Do I think Birdman has a lot to offer in the realm of re-watchabiliy? Not so much, but one viewing will leave you with a chuckle and enough questions to ponder.
Having been involved in theater, this film struck a chord with me. Nobody gets away unscathed, not the actors, not the critics, not the administrators. Michael Keaton delivers the performance of his life with Ed Norton as a close second. Unseen hero of this brilliantly conceived movie is González Iñárritu who turns this script into a memorable film by diligent direction and demanding everybody to go the extra mile. Bottom line: Wow!
phenomenal performance by Michael Keaton and Edward Norton, Kudos to the editing team who had to edit the film to make it look like the masterpiece it is..
I was expecting the movie to get better from the opening scene until about an hour and a half through. It was boring, hard to follow, and just unfunny. The only redeeming quality this movie had is the way it was shot, very interesting. Maybe since I haven't worked in Hollywood or on Broadway, I just don't understand the quality of the film, yet that is the core problem. A movie should not alienate viewers. I can picture a collection of hipsters raving about how artistic it is. This movie was pure Oscar bait and it accomplished its goal. Truly unfortunate American Sniper lost to this overly artistic, almost narsisistic film.
After viewing this film three times now I can certainly state that many elements within it have been masterfully crafted. The near seamless editing alone is something to behold, no straight cut are ever made, instead beautiful long takes weave each scene together giving the actors the time and space to showcase some truly phenomenal performances. Michael Keaton and Edward Norton are on top form throughout this film, a perfect scene to watch out for is when they are rehearsing on stage with each other, they play off each others performances brilliantly. The merging of diegetic and non-diegetic sound is another unorthodox element that this film experiments with and the results are incredibly immersive. To summarise Birdman is technical masterpiece which satires our modern society and outlook on other individuals within that society, though it may not be for everyone it's definitely worth a watch purely due to the amount of passion that has gone into making it.
Holy crap, the acting was amazing! The actors are playing actors playing actors. I'm confused but in a good way. Definitely a trippy movie thoughâ??it'll mess with your mind!As the highness slowly fades away, I'm forgetting more and more of why this was such a super duper awesome movie, but it was! ...Super duper awesome, I mean.
Although I, personally, think that Boyhood should have taken home Best Picture at the oscars, Birdman is an almost as worthy a candidate, with the greatest strength being the ensemble cast, Birdman , like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, doesn't just fly-it soars.
It's extravagant qualities make it hard to see through to what seems like a narcissistic motive.
not quite what I expected but actually very good
Weird and very confusing at first glace, but don't judge a book by it's cover. Birdman is dashing! It's probably the closest you can get to a director's mind and put it on the big screen! Birdman is the only movie that puts theater into a movie by using only one take! This truly represents that theater is mostly one take, done! Pretty original in my opinion!
This movie really cranks up the weird. A way to describe it is beatnik, or maybe jazzy. Very aggressive bebop jazzy, not smooth, mellow jazzy. A hipster on coke. There are moments of brilliance, to be sure. In some ways its morality was prescient, but at other times it seemed a tad sociopathic. I liked how the voice in Keaton's head was sometimes demeaning and sometimes uplifting, and it seemed very human. But in general, I can't completely get into the style. I'm an emotionally inhibited person. I just can't relate very well to people constantly displaying over the top emotion and always telling people exactly how they feel (and as a guy who writes movie scripts, that's against the rules too) and being really angry and horny and such. Guess that means I'm not ready to be an actor. Keaton gives a solid performance. Unfortunately, he was up against some amazing performances this Oscar season, and I actually rate him at the bottom of the nominees. The supporting cast was stellar. Inarritu, of course, added some really great images. On the whole it was, uh, flighty and slightly disconnected, but that is appropriate. The score is grating and distracting, but fits Keaton's character's mental illness. The structure really does fit the narrative, and the play within a play dynamic I'm sure rated highly with the Academy voters.
quite possibly the best movie to come out in 2014
I can't tell you in words how much I enjoyed this movie. Exceptional from start to finish ð~
really really recommend this one...brilliant
Not what i expected left before it finished...
All I can say is that I came out of that experience feeling very confused
Mesmerizing direction and top-notch acting from everyone, even Zach Gailifanakis delivers.
I've seen so many opposing articles and reviews on what Birdman is 'about', and I'm not sure I agree with any of them. In the end though, I don't think anybody's experience of this film would be improved by knowing for sure what any of it means. There is a contradictory muddle of themes throughout, and actually that matches perfectly with the astounding camera work. It never stops moving. Add a jazz drum score and you're well away. Maybe it's corny, but for me the only unifying theme in this film is love. Whether it's love for your family, for your work, for the theatre or for cinema... and that's not just a sappy thing... sometimes ones love for one thing can block the understanding of another... or maybe you're just too in love with yourself. For me this picture is a near-perfect study of imperfect lives, full of joy and frustration. Overall though it's thoroughly enjoyable, and that's the main thing.
WORST MOVIE EVER MADE. Terrible direction, dreadful acting and a drum beat which made me want to vomit throught the whole movie
I liked it. Yet I'm afraid to tell people I didn't love it, for fear of sounding simple.
Wow that was an experience and different!Michael Keaton was very impressive and the film dark and then funny in so many way. Not sure really what to say. Would I recommend it, maybe not. Did I enjoy it, maybe yes......
About as good as film gets, the kind of film that reminds me of why I love cinema and film. Technically, this is a breathtaking exercise with the camera moving around in seemgly impossible ways. Add to this a superb cast, Norton has not been this good in years, ditto for Watts and Stone. Ultimately, this is Keaton and Alejandro's show. Keaton is just brilliant with a layered performance that highlights insecurities and ambition in ways that just blew me away. Simply put, I haven't seen a film like this before and it grabs me each time I see it....
I think it could have worked better as a short or shorter film. Keaton is amazing to watch the point is anything else going on in the story that does not directly connect to him came off as boring and tasking. funny enough his character's message is the strongest but is the only one that does not feel as if it is being shoved down your throat
A movie with the soul of a play
Great movie. The acting was tremendous!
As far as 2014 movies go, as it as good/better than Interstellar? That's tough; they're so different. I don't know. But, was it a great film? Did it move me, even a little? Yeah, yeah it did. So good to see Keaton back at it.
Delightfully bonkers
Riggan: I wasn't even present in my own life, and now I don't have it, and I'm never going to have it.
Artistic and lovely, feels like I am looking at art
I didn't understand it at all. The most confusing part is the fact that it's called a masterpiece.
Brilliant acting, but it's too artsy for me.
Some friends of mine didn't like this. Some hated it. I'm not sure why. The one continuous editing astounded me. It's as if I'm there. Just watching all this madness unfold. Keaton, brilliant. Norton, brilliant. And funny too.
A bizarre film meticulously filmed, boldly imagined and biting in its satire and observations. Valuable more as a psychological exploration of the relationships between art, artists, reality and intentions, Birdman is occasionally too vulgar and contrary in its style, but it is a valuable viewing for those of the artistic stripe and immensely thought provoking. Also, it takes some delightful jabs at the current superhero blockbuster craze.
far more introspective and quirky than I expected. A really good film.
Great movie about struggling to keep relevant in a rapidly changing, self-obsessed world.
This movie was phenomenally made. Great cinematography, a shame it didn't get nominated for score. Best movie of 2014. Edward Norton was off the hook, not to mention Michael. Best movie i have seen in a decade. Not since Pans Labyrinth have I seen an equal measure.
A little overhyped and over-ambitious, but still worth seeing.
I don't think this should've won best picture but it was still pretty good.B
Great great acting, but it was so dull to me and I found everyone painfully irritating.
EPIC MOVIE OF 2014 WTFFFFF IT'S THE BEST
This movie is horrid. I could not make it past the first hour. Perhaps it got better, but it was constant tension with a very slowly unfolding plot, it had one. Just a collection of annoying low life people.
Maybe it was built up to much for me but while I feel it was beautifully shot I felt this movie was quirky just for the sake of being quirky. meh
Thought it was a bit overhyped, quite liked Ed Norton in it though
A masterpiece! Truly a landmark in film history! The film creates an atmosphere that I have never seen another movie create before. The writing and dialogue between the actors (All actors were superb) was perfectly protraited and not to mention the drum score was amazing! The cinematography was truly unique with its one take style and it just makes the film along with the editing style. I did not find one flaw in any departments of this film and overall, it deserves it's oscar. Well done!
Slam Dunk best movie of the year. Every performance is fantastic especially Michael Keaton. Most enjoyable movie I have seen in a while
The movie tries hard to be smart and modern, but ends up being stupid and lacking for a reason to care about it.
Not as good as I expected. The Play within a Play genre is great for getting inside the skin of the acting profession, and this one is quite good while it's exploring the main protagonists and their relationships. I could have done without the the schizoid hallucinations though, this guy would not have got as far as he did if suffering that badly. The final half an hour or so is just silly.
Stylish, well made, powerful performances, and a very funny and interesting story. It's not a masterpiece but it's a very strong film and I have no issues with it winning best picture.
A manic, exhilarating thriller, Birdman is an audacious and stunning work of art from Alejandro G Inarritu, and features such a strong cast that a case could be made for up to a half dozen acting Oscar nominations. But it is the work of Michael Keaton and Emma Stone that really make viewers take notice, and make Birdman worth every second of your time.
This one sucked eggs. If I had known if was of the black comedy genre, I *never* would have purchased it! The language is awful, too. I definitely do not recommend this one.
I still can't believe this movie won best picture....
I enjoyed Birdman immensely. Michael Keaton and Edward Norton were amazing, the magical realism was never a problem and the technical execution was really interesting. And the story, one man's existential identity crisis, was astounding. The movie worked as a satire, as a comedy and as a drama. Oh! the music!
Despite having fantastic performances by actors like Michael Keaton and Edward Norton, realistic and intimate backgrounds, I feel like this film just keeps going and going, without an end. I am tired, I am numb and I am irritated. The continuous shot is very interesting and original, yet it ruins the film for me. Perhaps, I am not used to such long, one-shot films.
Is not a stupid movie , I like the movie seen it twice
It's amazing on all technical levels, but the characters and the performances are what breath life into the layers of surreality. Definitely an Oscar worthy performances from all the cast.
A little too focused pm Hollywood fascinated by Hollywood - or Broadway
Now I know why this film won best picture.I was really blown away
A movie for film students, actors, and Oscar fiends, Birdman does everything right. Perhaps, too right. It's cinematographically pleasing, meaningfully layered (to the point where every little word or prop in a scene is related to some sort of symbolism and not the necessarily the good kind where you have to search for it or only discover it after watching the film), and iconically written, and well acted. It's a painting hung in the Museum of Film but you aren't allowed to touch it or interact with it. It should make you feel inspired but you only feel depressed. With so many fakeouts, loose-ends, and new-age film school techniques, I walked away unsatisfied but understanding of the movie's reclaim.
I'm still not sure how I feel about this one.
Certainly very different...and definitely very innovative filmmaking. But I liked Boyhood and Imitation Game better.
Once again critics confuse quirky with funny. This movie is odd, to be sure, but there is hardly a laugh in this film. And Micheal Keaton, who usually blends quirky and funny so well, in this film hardly seems like his typical self at all. Now, maybe this is a good thing because he finally got an Oscar Nomination out of it, but the role lacks many of the fun qualities that make me such a big fan of him as an actor.
Still pondering this one. Definitely Oscar worthy.
Wow. I can see why this won Best Picture. Amazing performances all around. Love the long single-shot camerawork. How did they DO some of that? The movie moves brilliantly from scene to scene in one unbroken take regarless of time and space. I also love the back-of-house vs. on-stage transitions. It evoked Noises Off which I loved as well. Bravo.
How is it possible to get a movie this correct? From the acting to the soundtrack to the cinematography to the surreal imagery to the multi-layered conflict, Birdman is an incredible work of art. Now here's the big question; is Birdman better than Boyhood? It's a shame that both of these amazing movies came out the same year. I wish they could both win Best Picture.
Beautifully shot, great acting, and it makes you think rather than throw stupid jokes in your face. Birdman is everything a comedy should be and more.
A modern classic; every aspect of the film is beautiful and profound.
Weird. Very weird, but also entertaining and laugh-out-loud funny at times. There are some very interesting and unique visuals here. So many years later and I still love Michael Keaton. He and Edward Norton play very well off each other as warring co-stars. Emma Stone lends a great performance as Keaton's daughter, a recovering addict who is his assistant. I don't think I've ever seen her so dramatic in a role and I love it. There is one scene where she rips into her father that is epic because you can see the anger and frustration in her eyes. She deserved to be nominated for this role.
genius! Plays your my mind a little too much. Didn't need all the vulgarity.
Derivative of Barton Fink, this director's Biutiful at least had originality going for it. I liked the score, it made you think the film was about to take you somewhere interesting. Deceitful but powerful score.
I'm sorry but all I see is shouting, only reason I managed to stay to the end is because the oscar mentions, one of the most boring film ever seen
I thought it was great. A bit claustrophobic and self indulgent. But it hit on many deep ego issues that not only middle/late age actors have
Impressive cinematography, but ultimately soulless.
That was different...loved it ð???ð??»
Beautifully directed, fluid dramatics and entertaining humour. Excellent film.
For me this was overly pretentious and I could not even finish it. It was just plain not interesting at all and I do enjoy a good quality drama. I couldn't fathom for the life of me why this would get best picture and I do think there were much more worthwhile pictures out there. It makes me wonder if I fell for maybe the purpose of the best picture award to make me even bother to rent the movie in the first place. I wonder if I would've even rented this picture if it had not won best picture.
Good film! Sadly Michael Keaton ' s comeback coincided with Redmayne's turn in the 'Theory of Everything.' Otherwise, he could have easily snagged Best Actor for his performance on this film.
Its a good movie good directing but highly overated
The meta appeal of Michael Keaton haunted by his former superhero past in Birdman/Batman is an interesting hook at face value. His acting is phenominal and the innovative long shot cinematography executed throughout the film has never been directed better. It's a dark comedy that leaves open ended events and subtle hints of symbolism for the viewer to piece together various meanings. While I wouldn't have awarded this a best picture award it's still an entertaining and innovative journey.
Dark sad artsy waste of time. I hated this movie
Birdman is a blast of style, humor and pathos with each of the people involved giving their all. It's undeniably funny and weird in all the right ways. Even though, in some of its bigger themes, its reach exceeds its grasp, it's still an invigorating story about show-business and where we should find our worth.
Kind of like The Wrestler but with actors. I think I liked The Wrestler more but this was good.
aunque no le encuentro explicación lógica a algunas cosas, debo decir que esta es una obra maestra y única en su estilo. Vale ciento por ciento la pena sentarse a verla o incluso pagar una entrada al cine por este film
Awesome, just awesome.
Very good but little overrated..
Major disappointment!! Black Comedy??? Absolutely NOTHING funny about this movie (well, maybe when he got locked out of the theater in his underwear!) I expected way more from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton. They gave good performances but the plot basically sucked. If you enjoy a very negative movie where everyone is yelling and arguing with everyone else, you will LOVE this movie!
Keaton and Norton were great. Well deserved Oscar for best director.
One of the most original and unique films I've seen. A muse see. Pulls you right in from the start with the film's cynical and often times bitter look at the life of a struggling actor who attempts to regain the fame he has captured so long ago...
As good as I figured it would be. You've got to be on your toes though. Watch it very carefully!
Bit disapointed. I guess I'm not a black comedy person!
Dark Comedy is right! Only one laugh! Not funny. Psychological babble among friends, dejected children, ex-spouses & disgruntled wanna-be actors & actresses. I saw no redeeming value in the movie or the characters. A looming threat throughout wondering when someone was going to commit suicide. Disturbing. The disappointment was doubly sad because I've been a Michael Keaton fan forever and it was by far his best serious dramatic performance EVER! If you love Keaton, you can suffer through the negative storyline but don't go expecting a laugh... quite the opposite. The ending is depressing.
Just fun. Lots of fun. Engaging actors and a great story are just gravy.
Good role for Beetlejuice - but no characters that one can care about - too many egos
Met Director and and writers - I hope they create together again!
Everyone should watch this movie.
I watched it onboard plane to NYC which gave an extra flavor and which impaired my assessment ability. And once I arrived I discovered a friend appreciated it for its camera work. Me too.
Pay attention or you will miss a good movie.
Michael Keaton is incredible, one of my favourite actors.
A depressive, talking, philosophical, piece of BS. The Broadway play does a wonderful job of describing itself. I felt like I was suffering through this flick waiting for it to finally end. How the heck was this nominated for awards? It is weird, awkward, and attempting to be edgy. Yet quite shallow as the key scene... in the ending act of the play... is quite predictable where the lines will blur between performance and life. Am I supposed to believe he is now free by flying away? Yuck!
What a self indulgent piece of crap!
weird and unitelligible
Birdman is a film that is directed in a revolutionary way. The whole making the film look like it is one shot is more effective than I expected. It is also wonderfully acted and expertly written. Michael Keaton does an excellent job in the film along with the rest of the cast does fantastic as well. At a technical level, the film is very well made. However, due to some pacing issues the film stumbles in a few places and it also feels a bit overlong. I wouldn't call it worthy of a best picture win but I definitely think it is an effectively made film that has important themes about society and one's place in it.
Pretty Amazing Execution. Great Story.Its 5 stars, but I was happy to see it end... ;-/
Birdman is one massive statement of the film industry and manages to hit the nail right on the head.Its one incredibly we'll crafted piece of film and is one that won't be forgotten.Also the return of a legend Michael Keaton comes back with a killer performance.
Very hard to follow....and what for?
Bizarre à souhait avec beaucoup d'ambiguïtés. Le concept de plan séquence avec la batterie hypnotisante rend le tout essoufflant mais c'est ce qui fait sa beauté.
a good thriller, the scenographic proposal is the best in years, the game camera is unique. oscar worthy winner. however, the story at times does not reach the maximum point of ecstasy for some commercial viewers
Started off a bit weird but it definitely picked up the last half of the movie. The acting is great but I'm not entirely sure it warrants all the academy awards it won
BIRDMAN or The Unexpected Virtue Of Ignorance is beautifully filmed. The only thing I didn't really like about this is lack of ability for me to relate to the main character. His struggles appears to be more forced then convincing, However this is in no way related the wonderful performance Michael Keaton provided. I bought this movie as soon as I watched it.
Michael Keaton's portray of a fading actor is quite promising. Lots of names either the celebrities or movies or plays with the similar story came to my mind while watching this movie. You are not Farrah Fawcett, Riggan! How sad but true....
Really different. If you want a movie that will surprise you with some really surreal moments and really nicely done panning shots, it's worth watching for Norton's arrogant bastard alone. Weird and witty, though it can wallow a tad in showing you how insane actors can be, in my experience at least it's telling the truth. Without the surreal Birdman moments it would still be an interesting story, but the persona of Birdman is very relatable with my own Calvin and Hobbes daydreams from childhood.
I wasn't really sure what to make of this one. I didn't love it and I didn't hate it. I thought it was fun watching Michael Keaton's descent trhough stress and I thought everybody did a good job acting. I didn't get bored, but I just didn't feel a strong connection. I feel like this title is a bit too up its own ass.
Oh boy, oh boy.Where do I even begin with this overrated piece of shit?Lazy directing, boring, a thoroughly uninteresting Emma Stone, and the whole thing just collapses into mush, from scene to scene. The low point of the film is all the moralistic subliminal messages about how women in theater should be self-effacing and respect the tired aging provocateur, even if his inspiration has all but vanished. The whole thing collapses into a colorless, mean-spirited grey mush.This movie feels like getting ranted at by an old burnout at a coffee shop, or an estranged father going on a moralistic tirade.
Very gritty - first line of the movie lingers in the of the whole movie. Great performance by Keaton.
Phenomenal director, acting - but Clint gave this one a run -
Now after the first time ive watched it I thought it was pretty overrated. Nah, it was pretty darn awesome. It was so original and clever and suprising I could never tell what was going to happen. It avoided all drama clichées that I noticed. The cinematography was the best i've seen in awhile and all the performances were great. Not a single one was bad. It was also pretty entertaining and extremly funny. Score was great and some lines stuck with me after i watched that I suspect will be famous quotes a few years from now delivered all by the Birdman himself. The ending was also magnificent and for me, perfect. There is no technical faults in this piece.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
This movie was a big Eff You to just about everyone. Critics, Hollywood, news media, the public, and more. You can't say you loved it or hated it without that statement defining exactly how the movie pinpointed who YOU are. The acting was spectacular. The story had a good base, with too much surrealism thrown in to be satisfying. The narcissistic focus of all the characters made me sick, but that was exactly the intention. With all its good qualities, I came close to turning the movie off several times, thanks to the ridiculous surrealist twists. I wanted a movie based in reality, and every time something REAL was about to happen, Birdman would spread and would steal that from me. Also, the music was a good fit for the movie, but in the middle of a deep conversation, the drum beat would kick up and bring you out of the moment enough that the impact of the interaction was then totally lost.
Galfinakis is in an Oscar Winning movie... Like its sibling film Whiplash just up the street, we're enticed to explore a nook of the arts industry nobody should ever care about. Roughly going along the same success story plot points, Birdman at least has the charm of Innaritu's semi-artful storytelling style, with the floaty camera and weird cuts from realism. The film is full of lame kid-level jokes Galinakis must have wrote in, but with the film's self-aware perks it's warmly welcomed as self-mockery.
Engaging and meaningful, I can appreciate the symbolism etc...but the continuous-shot cinematic effect for the ENTIRE movie is vertigo-inducing and a bit much. Ed Norton is the man.
Is Birdman the best movie of 2014? I'd say no, but I do say it's a fully enjoyable movie that's rather fun and heartfield. The main thing that brings it over the top is the camerawork: With few exceptions, the movie is designed to look like it was shot all in one take. One scene flawlessly segues into the next by the camera following characters who only briefly appear in the previous scene. It's quite a ballet.How's the actual story though? It's pretty good. It's about an aging actor trying to perform a theater play to make his comeback. The ensemble cast really makes this-specifically Emma Stone and Naomi Wattts. I wasn't really so much struck by Keaton's story but the ensemble cast carries it. The latter half suffers a bit because it focuses mostly on Keaton and forgets a lot of the supporting characters, but most threads do wrap up nicely. It's a good movie.
if you didn't like this film, then watch it again. you didnt understand the first time through
The cast was very good. It reminded me of having to take that poetry class in college. I just didn't get it. Camera work was annoying.
Creo que esta pelicula es mas ego que otra cosa
incredibly overrated. a movie to look back on as one of the worse movies to be awarded best picture. That goes without saying that this was not a very good year for movies. I really have no clue what critics see in this movie. It definitely had great cinematography and no doubt great performances by michael keaton and edward norton, but other than that I thought it was an unintriguing, boring, and painfully bizarre film that goes in circles and lacks a strong purpose. Say whatever you want, but in the end the film is not one to be remembered.
Susie did not care much for this film, but I thought it was excellent. Her complaint was that it was too artsy and did not make much sense, but I thought it was intense. Perhaps the difference in our opinions can be found in my empathy with the aging Riggan, played by Michael Keaton, who was trying to reinvent himself. Torn between his fear that his critics were correct , his own insecurities, and his waning self-belief, Riggan's only solace is found in a voice which he is convinced always tells him the truth. Perhaps it is just an ego challenge, men experience, but I could certainly relate to Riggan's uncertainity that his life has had any lasting legacy. While my evaluation of this film would be closer to the critic's 93% as opposed to the audience's 79%. I would imagine my wife's rating would be lower than the audience average. Maybe women do not face the same insecurities about the contribution to life they have made. Then again maybe only those men who tend to over-analyze everything share Riggan's doubts.
The biggest Hollywood circle jerk I've ever seen.
I would not watch it again.
Really different but outstanding insight and acting
Meh! I think the point of this film is focusing on how ignorant and unaware actors and the film industry can be in their own self-indulgence. But this movie itself seems to me to be very self-indulgent, not very interesting and just plain boring.
Loved the seemless feeling of the film, like it was continuously shot. Had me scratching my head at the end, but still a good movie.
Good, and entertaining. Maybe would have given 5 star if I worked in the film business. This is no action movie or comedy. But a look into the life of an actor, an aging male actor. Attempting to to regain his dignity. And in between is some funny and some real intense drama. Excellent score
What did people like about this?
Shouldn't have one best picture, very average movie and weird
Beautifully made, shots are beautiful, sometimes the pacing throws me off... The Fight Club Psychological elements are so elegantly placed...
Got a little too weird for me. But the film-making was pretty cool to watch.
One of the WORST movies I have ever seen. In the same class with Cloud Atlas. Can't understand how good actors can lower themselves to make such crap movies. I need a refund! I would give it zero stars if I could. Two hours of my life wasted.
what this movie is like: There's a guy watching a car crash and he's vomiting. it's like watching him vomit.
Loved Loved this movie! Didn't know what to expect going in and glad I didn't. It was weird, raw, vulnerable, tongue-in-cheek, multi-layered, brilliantly made, and unique. And the cinematographer should never have to pay for another meal the rest of his life. Probably not for everyone (or me in the wrong mood), but I sure enjoyed it.
Rubbish. Utter, unadulterated rubbish. Hated it. Waste of time and money. Rather watch paint dry.
Celery T not CD-Ryehddyujudu
Different from what I was expecting, but still good.
Acting was great, but the movie was terrible, sometimes it left you in a hallway for three minutes wondering why u are u in the hallway in the first place.
this is a wonderful movie the acting is good, the story is good, and the writing is beyond good!! its dark, light-hearted, and one heck of a good movie! so you better check it out.
The technical achievement of this film, the mood and tension captured - this is where the movie excels. The story gets lost in the last 20 minutes as Riggan continues to lose his grip on reality. I am fascinated by films that can imaginatively decoy this condition but the flying sequence get like an elongated stall from the more interesting action taking place in the theatre. The ambiguous ending left me uninterested.
Bird man is ambitious, unique and a very interesting take on importance and everything in Hollywood. With a interesting ending and many strong performances it could drag on at sometimes, but the doesn't detach from its meaning .Rating: 8.0 (A-)
Unique and mesmerising. Lifting a weak plot, all the other factors chime in culmination to a wonderful product. Norton was brilliant and the final plot twist was the saving grace.
The one continuous shot feels very gimmicky and actually pulled me away from the narrative. Some pretty funny stuff but the times it attempts to be dramatic don't work. Black Swan dealt with the same idea much better.
I don't feel like I watched the same movie as everyone else. There's nothing that really made this movie standout for me. Especially not Michael Keaton's chin. All immature jokes aside; I don't get the hype. But to each their own...
Really well done. More of a movie about Broadway and Hollywood behind the scenes relationships, but done in a very unique way that keeps you interested.
Minimum the best american movie of 2014, if it's not the best of the decade yet !
Excellent~ Very refreshing! I was on edge the whole way through~ Brilliant acting!
Lubezki + Inarritu + that background score by Antonio Sanchez = Intense!! What else could it be?!
Michael Keatons performance is legendary and quite frankly the best performance of recent memory. Love the style of it.Every performance in it is amazing.It just sort of overdoes itself in its ending. It should have ended maybe a few minutes earlier.Overall though this is just fantastic.A treat.
Whoever has anything bad to say about this movie how about you stfu and reach.
Yeah.....ok??? Not sure I saw the proclaimed genius of this film.
Although no one can deny the brilliant acting in this movie it never ceases to amaze me what Hollywood finds to be artistic. Had they cut the artistic parts out and had this just been about developing a play in a action hero world the story would have been good enough. The rest was pure hollyweird arrogance where they make something just weird and try to pass it off as some masterpiece. The saddest part was the acting was so good if only they dropped the weird.
This movie really is beautiful for what it tries to accomplish. The nearly seamless streamlining of film and camerawork woven together with visual effects and polish works. The real problem with the film is it's real ambiguity, which is arguably just something to keep the magic of the film alive after you've finished it. It feels forced, like the movie is told from an inconsistent viewpoint in which the viewer is to assume sometimes you're following the thoughts and actions of Michael Keaton, and sometimes just wandering around and seeing what other characters are thinking or feeling.It's a mess, honestly, beautiful to behold but forced into a perspective of unknown perspective. I feel like this movie won some awards not just because they felt it deserved them, but more on the perspective that it seemed almost continuous. Bottom line, if you don't like artsy movies, this movie will not amaze you, nor will it feel like anything beautiful. The character transcendence seems to take a back seat to the camera trick, and it will leave you confused and uncaring at the end.Not really a movie for the masses, but people will watch it because it won those awards....
Indie movies are made to give you that feel of pure acting and simplicity that makes for a better film. I enjoy the summer blockbuster normally. Birdman's plot was ironic considering Michael Keaton being one of the first blockbuster comic book character in Batman. Which made watching this movie feel a bit fun for me, as I wondered how much of this did Keaton pull out of himself. The star of the film, to me, was Edward Norton. Other than Norton, the film was quite slow with a few funny scenes.
There is no such thing as a state of maturity in America, and the Director Inarritu shows this to us.
I can appreciate the cinematography, the continuity of filming, sound effects, drums playing in the background, and the acting by Emma Stone, Edward Norton, and Michael Keaton. However, this movie script is too bizarre for me to follow along and I almost feel like anyone who says they understand its sophistication are just bullshitting themselves.
certain things were difficult for me to get, but it is a wonderful movie showing creating and fighting man.
This movie is really layered and the camerawork is fuckin genius. The music in the movie put me off doh. I feel it didn't suit the tone of the movie at all. It was very jarring to me
pretty fukn good. amazing ending
I think this is the most technically and narratively ambitious movie of the year.But the story is very simple and drums keep beating .....
Amazing. Perhaps the most surprising movie I've ever seen. The camera decides, it never goes somewhere unless a door or a window is opened. It determines the story, leading us to believe that the story is random, the choice of scenes is random. We see how beautiful people try to fill up the main character's emptiness. We discover corners of love inside him and we hope that he'll become a better person.
The acting was fabulous; that was the only thing that filled my expectations. The film is more drama then it is comedy. I chuckled a few times in my head but was far from laughing out loud.
I enjoyed this movie other than the constant foul language because Michael Keaton was great! I'm glad to see him in movies again.
Extremely overrated movie. Definately not worthy of best picture
Excellent film with an amazing performance by Michael Keaton. It's good to have him back in the spotlight; I've always enjoyed his performances. The supporting cast is great too; especially Ed Norton (he's good in everything). A funny, sad, and surreal film. Though I had to look on the internet for the meaning of the ending of the film, once I understood it I thought the ending was fitting. Highly recommend this film.
hard to watch, but its a must see, great acting...
a well-acted one of a kind D-O-P. Black comedies represents symbols and feelings. This one's a very confusing, dark and sad comedy but kinda great at the same time because it's very unpredictable
Stellar performances from all. It's a simple movie that makes you think, at it's centre is a interest gimmick (The Birdman), that could feel very forced but here it's a great device for storytelling.
Superb cinematography, sick video-cam skills. I liked the new approach to movie-making. There were some great moments in there, especially with regards to his relationship with his past, his daughter, his daughter's mother. However, the movie felt very indulgent with all the characters just unable to look past themselves. I guess that's the point, but it does feel very suffocating.
Awesome. That's all I have to say.
Birdman is an absolute marvel! The script is original, cerebral and insightful. Director Alejandro González Iñárritu opens this film up in ways unlike anything you've seen in the past year- guaranteed! Birdman is an absolute must-see! Michael Keaton was on fire in a role that any audience member would say is a perfect fit! In addition to his performance, the film has a rich and talented supporting cast. The director's use long moving shots created the perfect amount of space that brought out their best and elevated every single roll; and the scene transitions were spectacular!Keaton is Riggan Thomson, a former blockbuster Hollywood phenomenon that has fallen out of the limelight, and is left clinging to his career by becoming a serious Broadway actor. However he is not alone. No, no, no, Thomson has a friend, his doppelganger ... the Birdman! And he demonstrates from the get-go how powerful an influence he is on Riggan. I'm not even sugar coating it; Birdman (or should I say Thomson?) actually has super powers.Not to downplay the super human element to this movie, but this film is not great because of a powerful fictitious hero. This movie is great because it is an original and introspective film into the minds of those we put on stage.It was absolutely fascinating. You see, the film is based on Keaton's character (Riggan Thomson) debuting a play on Broadway, and throughout the film you get to see the all rehearsals and previews leading all the way up to the debut!What was fascinating was, as you watch this film, you will see Keaton (or Norton and etc.) play their roles (in the film) and all in one shot, you see them shift their roles and they acting as separate characters- on the stage!This film draws you in with its main character. It sucks you in with the plot. The dialogue is ingenious and it is all shot as if it came straight from the theatre and it was playing right on stage in front of your faces!Birdman is currently nominated for 9 Academy Awards including Best Picture. So if by chance you find yourself not doing anything, watching Birdman would be a good life decision on your part!
Folks, we have one the best movies of 2014 right here. The gonzo direction that makes us believe the whole movie takes place in one continuous shot adds so much energy and zest to the movie, I can't even describe it. If you got your jollies off from the truely one shot take on Russian Ark, you're going to love the look of this film. Direction, aside the acting in this film is top notch, grabbing you right from the start. Keaton and the rest of the cast hypnotize you with performances that you don't soon forget. Driving the whole movie is a jazz percussion score that is so cool, you're always waiting for Miles Davis to kick in with his horn and join the drumbeat somewhere. About as perfect as a movie can be these days.
I hated this movie, the ending was bad. I expected a better movie. Avoid.
If you take pride in your taste in films like I do, this probably isn't the beat film to show someone who isn't fluent in English after describing it as a comedy. Brilliantly acted (Keaton and Norton really are incredible), amazingly filmed (the extremely long shots are cleverly edited so it looks almost like one single continuous shot - I found myself distracted l, actually, by trying to figure out wuere one shot ended and the other began since I knew this factoid beforehand), and very original. None of which hid the fact that during the entire film, there was hardly a murmur of laughter from the people in the cinema. That made it very very awkward for me after assuring my friends it was meant to be a brilliant film (I DO take pride in 'knowing' what a great film is), and was almost tempted to walk out. Need to rewatch it by myself, but at least I picked an Oscar-winner
I can see why Michael Keaton was nominated for his role .. It was a really interesting character. I can't say I loved the movie .. Very, kinda Robert Altman to me.
Ah yes, the hype. Well - maybe I'm 'one of the masses', one of those uncultured people that critics and artlovers look down on. I'm fine with that. I tried. I tried for about 20 minutes. Those 20 minutes made me so unexpectedly irritated, squirmish, mad and moody that I had to turn it off. For me, that was a bad thing, obviously, but it is also a strange kind of compliment that a film can have that strong an affect. Another compliment is that is seems beautifully, crisply filmed, carefully cut to make it look like one continuous shot. But that last thing got old really fast for me. The most annoying thing? The drums. The first 20 minutes of continuous drums made me want to bang my head against the wall - reading in one review that those drums go on for the full two hours was enough to turn it off. Something that feels like something learned in drama class, without the student understanding that for many people, it's not artsy but forced, intrusive and simply unbearable. As for the plot - sure, a satire about the goings on in filmland, the struggle to always keep current and happening, maybe? I don't care - for me, the message (if any) wasn't worth two hours of grumpiness with a continuous drum soundtrack.
Every once in a blue moon there comes an experiment film that every director wants to make or actually does helm it. They don't know if it is going to work, they don't know if it will win audiences, they just go forward into the unknown hopefully their movie is liked. BIRDMAN is Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu's experiment film and has now won the prestigious Best Film at the Oscars this past Sunday. Technological wise it is great, not THE HOBBIT great but even better because it utilizes few CGI to keep the story rolling. I also would like to mention that the film is a one shot film for an hour and 43 minutes. Wow. When I first saw the film in theaters, I was sucked into the film that I didn't even notice that it hadn't cut for a while. Once I noticed, I wanted to see how long it had gone without a cut. That's just impressive, there are a lot of closeups, tracking shots, Steadicam shots and it all takes place inside the theater where Riggan Thomson (the legendary Michael Keaton) is conducting his play.The camera follows this great ensemble inside the theater, outside the theater, into bars, into alleys that it just creates this following illusion that you're just ALWAYS there next to the actors, I really loved this style of filming. I've read many articles stating that one shots are very hard to do, they always mention the opening shot of Orson Welles' TOUCH OF EVIL as the originator of the one shot scene. More recently they mention Alfonso Cuaron's opening ten minute opening to GRAVITY and the motorcycle chase scene in CHILDREN OF MEN. There have been a lot of good one shots and when you see them you are just in awe of this technique. But enough of this technique, I feel like I'm rambling on, let's talk about the film shall we?Riggan Thomson is a washed up actor who starred in the popular billion dollar franchise BIRDMAN. He's trying to revive his career by adapting a Raymond Carver play, he tells one of his fellow actors that what made him want to be an actor was the time when Carver wrote on a cocktail napkin that he had a great performance when Thomson was a kid performing in a school play. Riggan is so caught up with his Birdman character that he hears Birdman's voice in his head all the time, but he comes off as a perverted, manic, much more vulgar version of Birdman. Maybe this is what Riggan is ACTUALLY thinking but is too scared to say? A lot of people believe that this is loosely based on Keaton's own career having done BATMAN and whatnot now trying to revive his career with this film and Keaton nails it. If Eddie Redmayne wasn't nominated along with him, Keaton would have won the Oscar for this film. It was a great performance but Eddie just took it one step further by portraying Mr. Hawking. How do you explain Riggan's secret levitating? Is it all in his mind? Was he high? The ending was a little weird, hence the four and half star rating instead of five but all in all it is a triumph for Inarritu who has had a great film career so far ever since he burst onto the big screen with his gritty and raw directorial debut in AMORES PERROS. It was just a matter of time before he won a Best Director Oscar. Great film.
Actors playing actors and a movie about movies. I can't say I laughed or was swept off my feet, but I certainly thought it was a very interesting, dazzling movie.
I feared the hype, but Birdman lived up to it! It's almost like the flip side of the equally glorious Boyhood. All cylinders were fired, and all of them worked: the technical camera & editing wizardry, the drum score, the performances (and the performances within the performances), the unexpectedly LOL hilarious dialogue, the skewering of Hollywood and celebrity (despite our reverence of celebrity, they really cannot fly) -- and the palpable heartache simmering underneath it all. But put that all aside, and it's a simple allegory about how each one of us continuously redefines our relevance. An individual's relevance is completely subjective, and it changes throughout his or her lifetime (and the changes accelerate as the years do). Whether you want international celebrity success, or to be a star in your own household, it's entirely your job and it doesn't stop until you do. That's why life is so tiring, but interesting. I definitely plan to watch this again sometime, it should age very well.
This film is great. The whole one shot thing is executed perfectly. Keaton, Norton, Stone and Galifinakis are all very enjoyable. The film features a mix of subtly and straight-forwardness. Artsy for the critics and funny for the audience. The film was definitely worth the watch. Five stars. 93% on my Tomatometer.
An intriguing, original film chronicling an embattled actor (Michael Keaton) who is trying to jump start his fledgling career one last time by directing, writing, and acting in a sprawling Broadway play with a temperamental actor (Edward Norton). While I personally do not believe this film should have won Best Picture, it is still a fine film due to incredibly strong and personal performances from both Keaton and Norton. It does get a little impressed with itself at times, and has about ten different endings before concluding on a ambiguous note, but overall it is still a good movie that deserves to be seen thanks to strong directing and an unpredictable script that keeps you guessing throughout.
Két napja láttam és azóta emésztem. Az biztos, hogy zseniális, csak még azt nem tudom mennyire. Már beírtam a naptárba, hogy jöv?re újra meg kell néznem és akkor talán a maradék fél csillagot is megadom.
Some very good episodes, and a generally satisfying storyline, but I'm not sure the illusion of a continuous take was necessary. I could tell when there was a cut, and it was distracting.
Got the inside joke, wish I could get my 2 hours back. This movie should be used to restart Mystery Science Theater 3000, it is that bad. For this movie to win any Oscars, especially when compared to Imitation Game is just silly.The real actors who work hard and never get the big break should be insulted by this movie. The few who get a big break and then feel a need to do something meaningful, please do so without wasting my time. You got paid for Luck and Good Looks, and you got paid well. Now don't present a weepy movie that was clearly written while on drugs, and not the fun kind.
Good acting can't save an over simplistic plot line. The great acting and cinematography kept me watching till the end (not to mention the fab drum score) but it was very slow at times.
You want the truth? If only I'd seen it sooner. This is one of the best films ever made. Period. No ifs and or buts. Any film lover or lover of art for that matter, needs to see this glimmering master work of cinema.
This movie is a clear reason why you should never listen to critics when deciding to watch a movie. This movie straight up sucks. The filming and camera views are annoying and will leave you dizzy. The story line is dumb. The movie takes place in a theatre the entire time. This is a poor man's fight club. Why and how this movie got nominated for Oscars is beyond me. I should have followed my gut and passed on this movie. The sound track is garbage as well. Thank god I didn't waste money on this embarrassment.
Riggan: I'm nothing. I'm not even here.Birdman habla de la vida de Riggan, un actor que fue famoso por su papel de superhéroe, y busca de nuevo la fama siendo director de una obra en Broadway. Somos testigos de las dificultades que encuentra en el camino y sus propias inseguridades que lo persiguen constantemente. Birdman más allá de una película es un gran logro de producción. Toda la película simula que fue filmada en una sola toma y lograr esto requiere una sincronización perfecta. Introduce también muchos elementos que normalmente no se ven en una película de Hollywood como por ejemplo esta realidad fantástica donde es difícil de apreciar que es verdadero o no. Alejandro González Iñárritu es un director que no le teme a sus retos y todas sus películas son innovadoras en su propia manera. Birdman es definitivamente la más original de todas. En cuanto a historia, me costó conectarme. Se enfoco demasiado en las tecnicalidades que lleva montar una obra de Broadway y siento que eso le quitó un poco de peso a la emocionalidad. Michael Keaton para ser el actor principal fue una opción excelente, porque él es Riggan. Fue un actor popular en su época gracias a Batman y luego desapareció, por lo cual puede reflejar su propia experiencia en el papel. Emma Stone como la hija rebelde de Riggan me sorprendió, porque este papel es completamente distinto a todo lo que ha hecho, y sorpresivamente logró dar una actuación realista. Zach Galifianakis se lució y se aleja de su fondo comédico, Norton también se lució y demuestra porqué la longevidad de su carrera y Watts y Riseborough impecables como siempre. Birdman es un buen paso hacia lo que podría ser una reinvención a el tipo de películas que se hacen en Hollywood. Ya basta de las secuelas y de las historias que se repiten una y otra vez. Fue una agradable sorpresa cuando Birdman fue nominada en varias categorias en los Oscar y finalmente ganar como Mejor Película. Es un gran paso hacia la dirección correcta.
film portraying the complexities of mental ill health...didn't really get what message it was trying to send...didn't enjoy the constant drumming, are they supposed to irritate me as much as the voices would irritate Riggan?!
juste pour toi david
What do we talk about when we talk about 2015 Oscar? Of course motherfucker! we talk about this!!
a very different type of movie. it has the illusion of being shot in on take but the story is really...odd. it wasn't what I was expecting going into it and played out a bit slow and drawn out. given the ending gives you a good feeling but you need to watch it all to understand. not a bad watch but it won't be for everyone.
Birdman is not at all a bad movie. I just can't wrap my head around why it's practically worshipped by the film industry. The performances of pretty much everyone are good, but not spectacular; Keaton and Norton are very good. What impressed me more than anything is how fast the one-shot cinematography makes the movie feel.
Interestingly weird movie.
It was interesting but I guess I just don't see what other people are raving about.
- 5 Stars. This was EXTREMELY painful to watch. Worst accounting for my $1.50 ever.I will never get this 1 1/2 hour back in my life.I am amazed that this won anything at the Oscars, especially up against American Sniper. Do not waste your pennies or oxygen on this.
Can see why it won all the awards
Funny and intelligent
I only watched this movie because it won best picture and best director. However it didn't appeal to me.
Of the Oscar nominated films in 2015 this was the best of them. That is not saying much though. This film watches (as the rest of them are) like it was written just to please the Academy. Yes the cinematography is nice and the story is well told by a talented crew but it has a Look at me feel all the way through it.