Saw Rush Hour 3.....5 out of 10. Nothing new...same ole Jackie Chan
Shoot em Up.....watched 10 minutes then turned it off. Not my kind of flick...
Shoot em Up.....watched 10 minutes then turned it off. Not my kind of flick...
Gunny said:
I wouldn't say I "hate" him but I don't particularly like him and certainly don't get why so many regard him as such a great actor. If you're gonna play the same guy every time out ala Denzel, Goldblum, you'd better be extra f'n charming...
Watched the latest Resident Evil last night. Surprisingly better than the first two, which ain't saying much (probably had to do with less involvement by Paul WS Anderson). The zombies -at least in the beginning- are far cooler than the ones from prior RE's. Other than that it was yet another WireFu/CGI suckfest.
Particularly laughable was how they would CGI Milla's face - from one scene to the next she would go from bad complexion to total cartoonish CGI facial makeover. I've never seen anything like that in a movie....
why I got stuck watching Music and Lyrics the other night with Hugh Grant and Drew Barrymore , I'll never know
I actually turned it off early, then was curious as to how their song turned out and ended up watching the rest of it
decent enough flick to watch with a date/gf/wife - not with the fellas
I actually turned it off early, then was curious as to how their song turned out and ended up watching the rest of it
decent enough flick to watch with a date/gf/wife - not with the fellas
Creeping-Cruds said:
What are you talking about same character?
Bourne, Good Will Hunting, Talented Mr Ripley, (urgh) Brothers Grimm, Good Shepard, Syriana.
The only characters with similar characteristics would be Bourne and Good Shepard.
Gunny said:
Different characters by name and situation obviously but still just the same ol' Matt Damon ultimately playing himself. Denzel does the exact same thing.
Compared to say Christian Bale, Daniel Day Lewis, Phil Seymoure Hoffman - guys who are extremely diverse, sometimes to the point of not even being recognizable from role to role..
But how?
Compare Bourne/Good Shepard and Ripley/Good Will Hunting it's like night and day.
Compare Bourne/Good Shepard and Ripley/Good Will Hunting it's like night and day.
Gunny said:
Night and day? Naw..
Wearing different hats isn't the same as taking on completely different personas..
Same face different place. Matt Damon is simply not diverse. The only time I've seen him even attempt to step out of himself was Bros Grimm and that was outright mediocrity.
As I've said before, Damon was excellent at portraying a coatrack in The Good Shepherd.
Creeping-Cruds said:
I disagree with you on this one. Compare Ripley and Bourne. Tell me how they are not different. How are they similar. Your entitled not to like an actor for whatever reason, I just don't see your reasoning on this one.
It always bothers me when people are dismissive of the abilities of actors such as Eastwood, Washington, or Brad Pitt (or going even further back, guys like Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant or Spencer Tracy). For lack of a better term let’s just call these types of actors “movie stars”. I think the thing that separates movie star type actors from the rest of their peers is a natural presence that comes across the moment they walk on screen. I don’t think this is a learned ability, I think it’s something that an actor has the moment they first step in front of the camera. It’s an almost inexplicable quality, but it’s an undeniable thing. That star quality is dual edged; obviously for the most part it's a positive, but in one specific sense it can be viewed as a negative, it’s utterly inescapable. It’s not something that can be simply switched off, no matter how fully Clint Eastwood realizes a character, the same star quality that makes them so charismatic also shines through that performance (they can’t escape it). Often movie stars give some of their worst, scenery chewing, performances when they attempt some obvious, against the type-cast role in an effort to escape their own on screen persona. I don’t think all of this makes them one trick ponies, I think it means the viewer has to look past that overpowering star quality to see the finer nuances in their work (which in the case of movie stars like Eastwood, Washington and Deniro is almost invariably there).
Oh! And yeah....
GO TITANS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh! And yeah....
GO TITANS!!!!!!!!!!!!
titanbuoy said:
and I agree - but going back to my "charming" post.. But I still don't put Denzel anywhere near Deniro or Clint though - that guy walks thru every role as Denzel, not a whole lotta nuance.
More interesting to me would be a discussion excluding all those same names but about the wonderful peripheral actors who have done amazing jobs with little or no kudos - the Ray Mckinnon's and Stephen Root's of the acting world..
:ha:
wowow
one little ommission from a single post spawns a dozen posts on the debate of one actor ,...... I still don't think Damon was all that good in The Departed. he's had better roles and done them better
i do think he does have some diversity
one actor that does not is Nicolas Cage
wowow
one little ommission from a single post spawns a dozen posts on the debate of one actor ,...... I still don't think Damon was all that good in The Departed. he's had better roles and done them better
i do think he does have some diversity
one actor that does not is Nicolas Cage
For all the plaudits Al Pacino's acting has earned him over the years, when was the last time he actually used a different persona in a role.
That guy has lost it.
Some actors have made a nice career out of just being themselves & thats what we love about them.Christopher Walken is a good example.
That guy has lost it.
Some actors have made a nice career out of just being themselves & thats what we love about them.Christopher Walken is a good example.
Puck said:
Check out Cage in 'The Weather Man' & especially 'Matchstick Men'.
He delivers very different performances in both of those movies. They're both excellent films too that I would recommend watching.
Childress79 said:
Think about it though, when was the last time Chris Walken had a leading role? He's been pigeonholed by that persona - basically relegated to playing the typical Chris Walken comedy bad-guy ala Balls of Fury.. He hasn't been challenged by a role in years. I'd like to see him take a shot...
Childress79 said:
Can't talk about Nick without mentioning Wild at Heart.
Creeping-Cruds said:
Does everyone realize Cage is really a Coppola, nephew of Francis Ford Coppola? He changed his name to Cage because he wanted to forge his own path. He did just fine for himself.:yes:
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
catching it on HBO, i have seen it before and it isn't giving me any other impression other than this adaptation blows
pitiful acting (especially Hermione)
extended scenes of nothing but staring
to much focus on BS (like the Yule Ball introduction)
more staring of course
it's disgusting
the one positive aspect of this trainwreck is some spectacular cinematography
:shake: :huh:
catching it on HBO, i have seen it before and it isn't giving me any other impression other than this adaptation blows
pitiful acting (especially Hermione)
extended scenes of nothing but staring
to much focus on BS (like the Yule Ball introduction)
more staring of course
it's disgusting
the one positive aspect of this trainwreck is some spectacular cinematography
:shake: :huh:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
