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.
Speaking of major actors who are the same in every movie: Russell Crowe, Denzel Washington, and Brad Pitt.
Russell Crowe loves to do the "mutter in a low voice" thing in every movie. Good examples of this are Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind.
Denzel Washington's characters are basically all like Training Day, where he plays cocky, street-wise guys who always have one-liners ready. And that was a great movie and I liked his character in it, but when you start seeing that character in every single movie then it gets old.
Brad Pitt is like a cooler version of Keanu Reeves. Take a look at his character in Moneyball and that's his schtick in every movie. He's the guy who is "so cool, it hurts," particularly in his later roles where he's always this totally cool dad who relates to his kids and is a super-awesome parent.
I was just reading another thread talking about real-life encounters with celebrities. Denzel Washington was named multiple times as one of the rudest celebrities people had met.
Maybe he's feeling completely frustrated by his movie roles?
I simply don't get the fascination with him - that is his acting. I understand women like his looks but I really don't get his acting.
In every movie he is just George Clooney saying lines. He never has any voice inflection or changes. He never seems to inhabit a character. He says his lines the same way from movie to movie.
He was highly praised for Syriana I believe, near as I can tell, he grew a beard, but it was still just George being George.
I put a lot of it to the movie industry hyping the daylights out of things knowing it will get ratings for things like Oscar telecasts, let's face it, it's highly political and suspect.
Does anybody really think he's even a good actor? What am I missing?
What don't you 'get'?
He's an actor. Appreciation for acting is a taste. While he doesn't particularly do anything for me, I don't expect that actors I do like should necessarily do anything for someone else because I understand that my appreciation and enjoyment of acting is, as I said, a taste. By the same token, I don't expect that just because Clooney doesn't do anything for me, it is thus mystifying that he might do something for someone else.
This idea you have that your tastes in acting equate to whether or not an actor is 'good' is an exercise in narcissism.
I suggest you watch what you enjoy, you avoid what you don't enjoy, and that you quit confusing your subjective preferences with objective truths that you think everyone else should hold.
Makes no difference to me. John Wayne was never anyone but himself, but people adored him. The public decides who is a star and who isn't, except sometimes an actor overcomes initial publicity. Ingrid Bergman was bitterly chastised by her fans when she transgressed in her personal life, then in later life she was glorified. Now, stars can do whatever they wish and while there are occasional exceptions, their careers remain intact.
Perhaps GC does, for the most part, play himself in most roles. However, he was most entertaining in "O Brother..." Lots of male actors play themselves, IMO. Very few have the range and versatility of a truly good actor. Another actor who does the same old schtick is Jeff Goldlum. He's always coy, somewhat mysterious, fast-talking and always smarter than anyone else. Hugh Grant is always a charming, smart-alecky, irresistible, womanizing cad. The examples go on and on. It seems that those who've primarily held supporting roles are technically better at their craft. Think: Gene Hackman, Forest Whitaker, John Turturro, Christopher Walken, for example.
Tom Hanks and Leo DiCaprio seem to be fairly versatile. The list is pretty short for leading men, I think. The late Philip Seymour Hoffman was probably the best actor I've seen.
I think Clooney is good for the parts he plays. It's all about casting. Look at Denzel, same deal. Every movie he is Denzel, but I like a lot of his movies and he fits the parts he plays. Same with Clooney. Not too much of this, not too much of that.
Well let me just say could any of us get up there and do most of the movies these people do?? I doubt it.. So whether you like or dislike an actor or actress they have to have something to be able to do what they do.. Just like you have a job that they might not be able to do BUT you are great at...
He was good as Bruce Wayne in Batman & Robin and good in the Oceans. I haven't seen anything else with him to truly give my opinion on him as an actor but I can think of much worse. Channing Tatum anyone?
Personally, I happen to love the guy. He's no Philip Seymour Hoffman, but then again, he doesn't try to be - he's not a great actor, he's a great movie star. There's a difference between the two, and he knows that difference and he knows which one of the two he is.
That's what he brings to every role. He's a movie star who delivers a line like few others in Hollywood today - give him the right dialogue, and that's your film. The rest of your script can be last week's grocery list; if you give him the right lines, he'll carry the movie. He won't try to be anything he's not, but what he is, he'll deliver letter-perfect in every single role. I'd ten times rather watch George Clooney playing George Clooney than watch Tom Hanks playing Tom Hanks or Robert Redford playing Robert Redford, any day of the week.
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.