Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Haven't seen The Crown (trailer looks good), and I guess I have seen her in The Lady in the Van, but don't remember her, but she's great in Steven Soderbergh's Unsane (2018).
He almost ruined Bram Stoker's Dracula for me. It was embarrassing how much better every other actor in that movie was.
I've gotten to where I won't watch anything with him in it. I did see the first Wick movie because my daughter said I would like it. Other than that, I haven't watched him since The Matrix.
I'm giving the bad acting title to Keanu Reeves in just about everything he's done. Not quite as bad in the Wick movies because he doesn't have to speak much.
But he was GREAT in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure!!!
Bad acting - Jack Nicholson in The Departed. Good acting - just about everyone else in the movie, especially Wahlberg, Baldwin, and Anthony Anderson in relatively minor roles.
Well, probably the most famous example is Kristen Stewart in the "Twilight" series.
She's actually a very well respected actress (I never saw Twilight.) She was phenomenal in "Into the Wild," "Clouds of Sils Maria," "Still Alice" and "Cafe Society."
She's actually a very well respected actress (I never saw Twilight.) She was phenomenal in "Into the Wild," "Clouds of Sils Maria," "Still Alice" and "Cafe Society."
First thing I saw her in was Panic Room and I thought she did a good job. (also never seen any Twilight movies)
Acting, like most art forms, is appreciated on a subjective level. People will disagree on what is good and what is bad. Now, sometimes there is near-unanimity of agreement. Few think Dwayne Johnson should be winning any Best Actor awards. But it's still subjective. Watch a film from the 1950s. The sort of acting that was considered par excellence at the time would not be considered so today. And today's acting trends that win acclaim will in the future evolve in new directions.
As far as realism goes, there is very little of it. Acting is invariably stylized, as is dialogue and as are mannerisms and myriad other elements of fictional representations. What appears to be realistic on the surface very rarely comports with what really happens in the real world.
It should also be mentioned that some films do not need what is generally considered good acting. Steve Martin in The Jerk just plays everything for laughs. But it works, and brilliantly. Bruce Willis in Die Hard nails it. It's a vapid film that's about watching the hero kick some bad-guy ass and crack some wise as he gets (back) the girl. Both actors have proven elsewhere that they have some serious dramatic chops, but such talents would have been woefully misplaced in those two films. They deliver in this films by not trying to be 'good actors' in the usual sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
