Oh yeah and Halle Berry is my pick for the worst actor of the 20th/21st century.
I think Christian Bale is much closer to the mark than any of the previous “Batmans,” but that said he was no match for Heath Ledger’s “Joker,” or for that matter Cillian Murphy’s “Scarecrow.” However, the villains are usually the best part of these action hero movies.
Richard Gere. Don’t dislike him, but I think he’s a terrible actor.
“Richard Gere. Don’t dislike him, but I think he’s a terrible actor”.
I used to think that too but he has gotten better with age in things like The Hoax and Im Not There.
Keanu Reeves is an axiom of the cinema — a thing of beauty and a joy forever.
He proves that acting is overrated.
Burl Ives was pretty horrible in most of his roles, as far as I can tell. You always get the sense that he’s thinking about food. I don’t mean to be cruel, may he rest in peace. I mean in most roles I’ve seen him in (Our Man in Havana, The [aptly titled made-for-TV stinker] Bermuda Depths, White Dog), between his rotely delivered lines, he looks like he really just wants to find the nearest table and sit down to eat.
He was great in Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer, though.
It’s a testament to how good DRACULA is that it can house two terrible performances by Reeves and Ryder and still be one of the coolest movies ever.
Sean William Scott is one of the worst. Although I’m not sure what he does is considered ‘acting’ in the rigorous sense of the term. (‘Dude! Check it out! I’m totally, like, acting and stuff! Isn’t that fucking awesome??’) How do people like him get film careers anyway?
At long last, Tom Cruise has put a stop to his scorched earth emoting policy and has attempted to actually act in recent years.
“It’s a testament to how good DRACULA is that it can house two terrible performances by Reeves and Ryder and still be one of the coolest movies ever.”
You can thank Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins for that. Tom Waits wasn’t too bad as Renfield either, and Monica Bellucci definitely knows how to light up the screen.
“At long last, Tom Cruise has put a stop to his scorched earth emoting policy and has attempted to actually act in recent years.”
Have you seen the trailers for Valkyrie?
The secret to Tom’s success is to surround himself with great actors and hope that something rubs off on him. Unfortunately, it usually doesn’t. I’m have tempted to see Valkyrie just for the supporting cast.
Hasn’t anyone mentioned those folks from “Twilight”?
Robert Pattinson is so wooden, he should stick to playing trees in high school plays. Anyone who compares him to James Dean has never witnessed a James Dean film (and yes, people have been making these connections) and just thinks it would be “cool” to connect the glittery vampire jerk with a genuine icon.
I’ve only seen one of Pattinson’s films and quite frankly I don’t care to see anymore of his, ahem, “work.”
However, Kristen Stewart makes Pattinson look like Pacino by contrast. If you have the stomach for it, watch the film again and look at the scene where Bella leers at Eddie in science class. Also, the scene where Bella is in hospital is Razzy worthy stuff.
I think on the basis of this film alone, Pattinson and Stewart should be mentioned.
Zooey Deschanel in “The Happening”…her performance in said film and the trailers for “(500) Days of Summer” (which I have no interest in seeing anyway) lead me to ask: does she ALWAYS bug her eyes out like she has an IODINE DEFICIENCY when she has no other expression on offer?
Speaking of “The Happening”: Mark Wahlberg, anyone? Again, I haven’t seen many of his films, for obvious reasons. He sucked pretending to be a rapper, so why should Hollywood be any different, right Wally?
I’m probably not the best person for this subject, because I do go out of my way to avoid actors and actresses who annoy me for whatever reason.
I feel that most people in Hollywood can act in the right circumstances.
Mark Wahlberg was awesome in The Departed. Brad Pitt was awesome in 12 Monkeys and Snatch and a bunch of other stuff. Ben Affleck was tolerable in Dogma. I absolutely cannot stand George Clooney, but he was tolerable in From Dusk Til Dawn. Christian Bale is the best Batman, except for the voice thing, seriously. And he’s amazing in American Psycho. Josh Hartnett is tolerable in Black Hawk Down. Tom Cruise is tolerable in Magnolia and amazing in Collateral (why hasn’t anyone mentioned that?). Hell, Ernest “The Cat” Miller was a failure as a professional wrestler (yeah, used to watch the hell out of it) but was good in The Wrestler. The right director and/or part can do wonders for an actor.
I don’t think Tom Hanks acts, though he is still enjoyable to watch in some of his films.
Gary Oldman is the best character actor ever, by the way. Just saying.
I think Wahlberg’s best effort remains Dirk Diggler in Boogie Nights. Not that he was acting, but it seemed the perfect role for Marky Mark. Since then he has tried to act, with a few bearable performances like that in The Departed, but otherwise it has been a rather soiled trail.
There was nothing tolerable about Dogma.
He, he…Keanu in Dracula is so bad it’s almost good. He really nailed the British accent too…not.
To me the term ‘character actor’ has always seemed odd, I would expect all actors to be able to play a range of roles, regardless of their looks or level of stardom. To me that is what makes a great actor, someone who is brave and talented enough to lose themselves in the character they are portraying and, yes, it should seem effortless.
I just watched Isabelle Huppert in the Piano Teacher. That was an unappealing, almost repulsive character, but Huppert fully inhabited that woman. As an actor this would have been an enormous challenge and something a lot of Hollywood actors would not be brave enough to do.
p.s I totally agree with the Orlando Bloom call, he is utterly hopeless.
The majority of American actors can’t act— it’d be easier to post who can act
‘The majority of American actors can’t act— it’d be easier to post who can act.’
Idiotic.
the main problem is they act too much
nothing seems natural
There is something to be said about life experience. An actor acts best when they have experienced their character’s stuation in real life, or something much like it.
And of course, a good actor knows how to use Research to fill in gaps, when they are unfamiliar witrh a character’s particular situation.
A well-acted character has literally been enfleshed into the very neural pathways of an actor.
Bad acting— to me—- happens when an actor:
a). Has no personal experience in dealing with the kind of issues their character is going through, and
b). Has not done, or does not know how to do, the research necessary to CONVINCE HIMSELF of the particulars of his character.
I capitalize CONVINCE HIMSELF, because I know, from my own actor’s training, that an actor’s first job is to convince HIMSELF of the reality of his character; until he has done that, he cannot hope to convince an audience of it.
As Katherine points out (above), perhaps the real test of an actor’s mettle is the degree to which s/he is willing to limn a charcter who is—- ostensibly, anyway—— repulsive, ugly, unattractive, cruel, vindictive, etc.
Sometimes you get an actor who is a master Researcher of the old Stanislavskian school; Here, I feel, is where Meryl Streep excels. I get the impression she does much, much research into the world of each character she plays…. Even into her seemingly shallow characters, like the fashion guru in PRADA, or the mother in MANCHURIAN. And she allows her research to bloom outwardly, informing her emotions and body movements. But she also is highly intelligent as a person…. and intelligence is a valuable asset for an actor. Some actors lack it (no names mentioned here….ahem).
Too much Stanislavski method, no?
Some of my favourite actors star in Aki Kaurismaki films.
Sometime told me that they thought Robert Pattinson did Blue Steel (Zoolander, not Bigelow) all the way through Twilight. I thought this was funny.
Zooey Deschanels’ acting is so bad, she really bugs me. There’s a fine line between kooky and charming and kooky and irritating. Zooey is irritating every time and I’m bewildered how she even passes the audition (nepotism and those big blues), recently I’ve made a conscious decision to boycott anything she is in. She could be in a film directed by Paul Thomas Anderson or Michael Haneke and I would have to just give it a miss. A line had to be drawn.
I used to feel the exact opposite about Miss Deschanel. Ordinarily, wild horses couldn’t drag me in front of the screen to watch the drivel that was Failure to Launch, but her scenes made me smile. What can I say: I go for those kind of characters in “real life”. Her act, however, got old, and fast (still love her in All the Real Girls though).
Keanu Reeves is hilarious, I´m sure he could never act, however the top of the list really belongs to Nicolas Cage and Thom Cruise, by the way his wife is really bad as well…
Having sat through INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS again just now, I have to repeat — Brad Pitt is a shitty actor.
Johnny Depp has always bothered me. It is not that he is particularly bad, it is just that he can’t help being Johnny Depp in everything. Lately, I think he has realized that and over-compensates, making his films that much more annoying.
@ GORDON on Depp
seriously?
@David Lincoln Brooks I’ve heard that Meryl Streep is so painstaking in the way she acts that if she is playing say two different people in two separate movies and there is not a significant difference in the accent of the character that she is playing, she’ll nail that particular accent in the area where the character comes from even though you’d really have to listen closely to the way she speaks in two separate movies. Say, someone in the midwest like Ohio and someone in Connecticut. I’ve lived in both places and I think there is a slight difference in the way people speak.
Daniel Day Lewis was so into his character in Gangs of New York that he would speak like the character even when they were not shooting any scenes.
@Hal. Yes, Meryl is the only US actor I have heard who can do a New Zealand (or Australian) accent. Usually it just sounds like awful cockney :-) and is most annoying to those of us who think our accent’s rather cool.
On the whole Cruise controversy, a friend of mine always says: “Cruise does Cruise very well”.
This is simply not good enough for me.
@aungwinmaw
Very seriously. His acting is gimmicky and lacks depth.
Blow was good, and I like What’s Eating Gilbert Grape but that is about it. I shudder to think what he is going to do to The Rum Diary, a book I love.
I’m not an actor, but I have always felt that Depp employs a more theatrical style than is common. It is kind of interesting but when compared with another actor who operates in the same vein – say, Phillip Seymour Hoffman – we see just how short Depp falls. The subtlety of the process is lost on him, he makes no attempt to draw us in, to let the viewer empathize with his character. He just relies on his song-and-dance number to carry him through to the credits.
There is no participation with Depp, you can only watch him.
chikenbaby
Keanu Reeves, every one of the child actors from Harry Potter (laughably bad), Leonardo Dicaprio is pretty awful, Hugh Jackman is just ridiculous, Christian Bale is fantastic in some roles (American Psycho), but terrible in others (Batman), same thing for Nic Cage, perfect in some roles, and not even trying in others…thats all i can think of right now