Differences in Movies: Albert Nobbs vs. Warrior

Many people have different opinions on what makes good movies. Most agree that the acting is at the heart of a great movie. However, I have to say that other components like directing, cinematography, screenplay, and musical score combine with acting to make a powerful film. Two weekends ago, I watched two extremely different movies: Albert Nobbs and Warrior. Ireland is the setting for the film Albert Nobbs, a story about a waiter, Albert (Glenn Close), masquerading as a male because of the harsh conditions females faced in the early 1900's. Warrior, on the other hand, is a film of two estranged mixed martial arts brothers, Tommy (Tom Hardy) and Brendan (Joel Edgerton) and their relationship with their father Paddy (Nick Nolte). The movie is all about the struggles of an alienated family, and proves to be a movie about redemption and underdogs. In my opinion, I thought Warrior was a far better movie than Albert Nobbs. Tom Hardy's and Nick Nolte's performances were extraordinary. I think they incorporated the lives of their characters deeply into their performance. The script was well written, the movie was directed beautifully (especially in capturing the tough fight scenes), and the cinematography along with the musical score was superb. However, Warrior did not receive as much hype as Albert Nobbs, and went unnoticed, when it should have been praised. The only drive in the movie Albert Nobbs was the performance of Janet McTeer and at times Glenn Close. The concept of the movie was interesting but it was executed poorly. The screenplay, adapted from the original stage play, lacked a certain quality, that caused the movie to become a drag. Overall, I believe that Warrior was an under appreciated film that should defiantly be viewed before Albert Nobbs.