Pacino's "Great Actors, Lots Of Crap Movies."

[Fried Gold]

I think this is way too easy and I agree with most of the posts so far. Especially Steve Martin.

But can anyone think of someone who hasnt made ANY klunkers?

I was thinking Christian Bale hadn't been in any dirge, but then I remembered Reign of Fire.

[Lady Sheridan]

Just 'cause you guys didn't like Age of Innocence, doesn't mean it's a turd... THE CRITICS HAVE SPOKEN!!!.

Sorry, Thunderbirds, Lost in Space, those are turds!!

And funnily enough, the idea of this thread was sparked by a discussion on William Hurt being a great actor who has a lot of crap films (The Village being one of the earliest cited examples) .

I saw that after I posted and slapped my forehead. This is a great thread, but one of those maddening ones as I'm trying to remember names to go with vague faces, lol.

I liked Age of Innocence, I just didn't like Day-Lewis in it. But I think The House of Mirth is better as far as Wharton adaptations go.

[Lady Sheridan]

Oh, I've got one! Tommy Lee Jones. The guy blows me away in the majority of his movies and he generally has excellent taste in scripts.

But Volcano? Man in the House? It's like someone blackmailed you, Jones. Like maybe you forgot to claim something on your taxes, so Dubya made you film Man in the House for him.

[Hermanator X]

I think this is way too easy and I agree with most of the posts so far. Especially Steve Martin.

But can anyone think of someone who hasnt made ANY klunkers?

I was thinking Christian Bale hadn't been in any dirge, but then I remembered Reign of Fire.

I would have said Jeff Bridges if it wasnt for Dino's efforts. Damn you Dino!!
(And K-Pax and Blown Away, and I havent seen Tideland).
But overall I think the guy has good quality control.

[Hermanator X]

Oh, I've got one! Tommy Lee Jones. The guy blows me away in the majority of his movies and he generally has excellent taste in scripts.

But Volcano? Man in the House? It's like someone blackmailed you, Jones. Like maybe you forgot to claim something on your taxes, so Dubya made you film Man in the House for him.

And Blown Away (see above )

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Morgan Freeman and those stupid unthrilling crime movies and other mediocre shit that that guy just doesn't deserve?

Anyone?

[godzillasushi]

Morgan Freeman and those stupid unthrilling crime movies and other mediocre shit that that guy just doesn't deserve?

Anyone?

[minstrel]

Oh, I've got one! Tommy Lee Jones. The guy blows me away in the majority of his movies and he generally has excellent taste in scripts.

But Volcano? Man in the House? It's like someone blackmailed you, Jones. Like maybe you forgot to claim something on your taxes, so Dubya made you film Man in the House for him.

I saw an interview with Jones right after he won his Oscar for The Fugitive. He said that the Oscar drove his price up, and he was going to happily accept very large paychecks for the next while to make sure that his family would be secure. Sure enough, right after The Fugitive he was basically repeating that role - the hyper-competent, order-barking Man In Charge - for a long time.

Fortunately, he's doing deeper and more interesting work these days.

[St. Alphonzo]

Willem Dafoe.

For every Platoon, Wild At Heart, Mississippi Burning and eXistenZ, there is tripe like Body Of Evidence, Speed 2: Cruise Control and xXX: State Of The Union.

And I say that with much love, 'cause when he's good he's untouchable.

[Chairman Kaga]

Just 'cause you guys didn't like Age of Innocence, doesn't mean it's a turd... THE CRITICS HAVE SPOKEN!!!..

Wow an 81 that makes it almost as good as Clueless

[judderman]

But can anyone think of someone who hasnt made ANY klunkers?

Daniel Day-Lewis.

Stars and Bars. No argument.

Damn, Kinski's gonna be impossible to top I think... but does anyone consider him to be a great actor in the first place?

Interesting, certainly. The day Herzog first met him, he walked into his apartment to find that he had filled it knee deep with dead leaves.

And while we're in Nordic lands, what about Jurgen Prochnow, Max Von Sydow and Udo Kier?

And just to add at least one woman to the list, Meryl Streep. Would anyone else have snagged an Oscar nom for The Devil Wears Prada?

Is Tim Curry a good actor?

[DaleTremont]

Speed 2: Cruise Control

[Lady Sheridan]

Dustin Hoffman.

At least he can laugh about it, though.

[HollywoodBabylon]

Dustin Hoffman.

At least he can laugh about it, though.

Unlike, maybe, Robert de Niro who's also starred in his fair share of turd movies over the past 15 or so years. Was subsidising Tribeca worth it, I ask?

[minstrel]

I think this is way too easy and I agree with most of the posts so far. Especially Steve Martin.

Steve Martin is not a good actor. He's a brilliant standup comedian who's abandoned what he's good at and attempts to do what he's not good at. Very, very sad.

But can anyone think of someone who hasnt made ANY klunkers?

John Cazale?

[HollywoodBabylon]

But can anyone think of someone who hasnt made ANY klunkers?

Daniel Day-Lewis.

Stars and Bars. No argument.

Damn, Kinski's gonna be impossible to top I think... but does anyone consider him to be a great actor in the first place?

Interesting, certainly. The day Herzog first met him, he walked into his apartment to find that he had filled it knee deep with dead leaves.

And while we're in Nordic lands, what about Jurgen Prochnow, Max Von Sydow and Udo Kier?

And just to add at least one woman to the list, Meryl Streep.

To be fair Streep unlike, say, De Niro has starred in very few bad movies over the past 15 years or so. Unremarkable ones, yes, but plain out and out bad, well they've been far and few between.
Max Von Sydow is a slightly curious case. His English speaking parts have been questionable at times and nowhere near justifies the great actor he is. You only have to see him in Bergman's movies or Pelle The Conqueror to know that.
Klaus Kinski? Well, let's put it this way: his Herzog movies prove beyond all doubt that mad as a hatter though he was, the guy had more screen charisma and presence than most of his US or UK contemporaries put together.

[Al Shut]

Just 'cause you guys didn't like Age of Innocence, doesn't mean it's a turd... THE CRITICS HAVE SPOKEN!!!..

Wow an 81 that makes it almost as good as Clueless

Wich is a good movie.

[Lady Sheridan]

Anthony Hopkins...

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

ANy theories on why these actors go through these spells of mediocrity or plain crap movies or go through these sleep walk periods?

It seems that an actor's ebst work is in the beginning stage of their careers? Do they get less hungry, too studly, comfortable when they become more successful? Their drive is gone, but more importantly with the comfort of an actual career, their 'pain' their 'suffering' that they may need for their art is gone too?

Is it just that the acting game is so hard and an easy but big paycheque is them considering getting payback for their past dues and sacrifices?

Or do they just run out of acting tricks, freshness etc.? They have nothing new to bring to the table? Or do they just burn out, run out of energy to push themselves or take themselves to the edge anymore? The effort is gone?

Anyone? Anyone?

Let's talk about WHY we have Great Actors in Crap Movies.

[judderman]

Anthony Hopkins...

At least he had the guts to admit on Letterman that Freejack was "a terrible film".

Funny think about Sir Tony; the more agitated or emotional he gets, the more Welsh he sounds, so when he said "terrribele feilm", you knew he meant it.

[TonyWilson]

ANy theories on why these actors go through these spells of mediocrity or plain crap movies or go through these sleep walk periods?

It seems that an actor's ebst work is in the beginning stage of their careers? Do they get less hungry, too studly, comfortable when they become more successful? Their drive is gone, but more importantly with the comfort of an actual career, their 'pain' their 'suffering' that they may need for their art is gone too?

Is it just that the acting game is so hard and an easy but big paycheque is them considering getting payback for their past dues and sacrifices?

Or do they just run out of acting tricks, freshness etc.? They have nothing new to bring to the table? Or do they just burn out, run out of energy to push themselves or take themselves to the edge anymore? The effort is gone?

Anyone? Anyone?


Let's talk about WHY we have Great Actors in Crap Movies.

I touched on this slightly in my first post. I think those reasons you gave are all relevant to one actor or another.

With Michael Caine, he says it himself - he wanted to keep his wife in jewellery so took pretty much every film that offered him a big paycheque. But he also acknowledges that the great roles are either for the younger actor or the much older one. When you get to 45/50 there's a good ten to twenty years of rather boring father figure roles before you start geting offered the King Lear type stuff.

And let's not forget good old fashioned ego - big stars, especially nowadays are what open a movie, they are the main draw. In a business where the opening weekend is pretty much all that matters a movie star knows that no matter how bad the movie their name alone will make it successful. A perfect recipe then, for a good actor not giving two shits about the quality of the material/director/co-stars.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Michael Caine said that the thing that made him decide what film he wanted to do - was the location.

Cheeky git, just wanted a free holiday most of the time.

I still think he bared his heart and soul for Jaws The Revenge though.

[minstrel]

I read somewhere Michael Caine quoted about the Jaws film he was in: "I haven't seen it. I hear it's dreadful. But I have seen the house it built, and I can assure you it's splendid!"

Caine was very, very poor as a kid and probably has some kind of deep-seated fear of being out of work, because his father was out of work a lot and it affected the family terribly. So he keeps working, whether the film he's doing is good or not.

[papalazeru]

Van Damme!!!

Such a promising start...



No, not that. Bloodsport. Then it went from strength with kickboxer and a collection of assorted Action films but then....Straight after Timecop....STREETFIGHTER!!!!

From there, it was all downhill for the big feller.

In the same vein...dear old Dolph who shot to fame until....ANOTHER CHEAP GAME/CARTOON/FILM tie in...Masters of the Universe...and again, it went down quicker than the Hindenburg.

[minstrel]

@papa: The thread title says "Great Actors", not muscleputzes.

[papalazeru]

@papa: The thread title says "Great Actors", not muscleputzes.

It was a great performance from him left cheek in both those films. The whole 'Bruce Lee' wobble and everything.

VD was great in his range.

I'm mean if we say acting the Brando should be in here too. He's pulled of some Greats and some stinkers.

[Chairman Kaga]

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

[Zarles]

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

[judderman]

Max Von Sydow is a slightly curious case. His English speaking parts have been questionable at times and nowhere near justifies the great actor he is. You only have to see him in Bergman's movies or Pelle The Conqueror to know that.

It's only because I know he's one of the greatest actors of the century that I've managed to forgive him the cumulitive debits of Strange Brew, Dreamscape, The Ice Pirates, A Kiss Before Dying, Needful Things, Judge Dredd and Rush Hour 3.

I'll let him keep Flash Gordon.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Yeah he was wholesomely splendid in Pelle The Conquerer though I did think the Best Actor Oscar nommy was a suprise. He was very moving and sympathetic as an old broken man in that with nowhere further to go expect be even lonelier. I do see a 'trend' though in his role description in Bergman's upcoming movies for me though, that he is always playing a man that is always questioning God in some way or another. Of course I have yet to see these performances so who can say, but from the looks of it, I do wonder if he is retreading the same avenue all the time.

Good not on letting him keep Flash Gordon though. No matter how bad that film was, no one can say a bad word about Syd in that. He well and truly ruled that film.

Plus he got to f*ck his own dwhoreter.

[godzillasushi]

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

Shortly before he died, he told his biographer, Barbara Leaming, that he had spent the day "playing a toy" in a movie about toys who "do horrible things to each other." Film historian Joseph McBride quotes Welles saying of his participation: "I play a planet. I menace somebody called Something-or-other. Then I'm destroyed."

[tapehead]

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

Shortly before he died, he told his biographer, Barbara Leaming, that he had spent the day "playing a toy" in a movie about toys who "do horrible things to each other." Film historian Joseph McBride quotes Welles saying of his participation: "I play a planet. I menace somebody called Something-or-other. Then I'm destroyed."

Sounds like he had a pretty firm grasp on the plot and concepts to me.

[HollywoodBabylon]

[quote= "Chairman Kaga"]Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

Shortly before he died, he told his biographer, Barbara Leaming, that he had spent the day "playing a toy" in a movie about toys who "do horrible things to each other." Film historian Joseph McBride quotes Welles saying of his participation: "I play a planet. I menace somebody called Something-or-other. Then I'm destroyed."

"Playing a toy"? God, I knew Welles' career and ambition had fallen away towards the end of his life, but not to that degree. Oh well, that justifies his Sherry Ads then - blotting out the pain of a once glorious career gone to dust.

[HollywoodBabylon]

ANy theories on why these actors go through these spells of mediocrity or plain crap movies or go through these sleep walk periods?

It seems that an actor's ebst work is in the beginning stage of their careers? Do they get less hungry, too studly, comfortable when they become more successful? Their drive is gone, but more importantly with the comfort of an actual career, their 'pain' their 'suffering' that they may need for their art is gone too?

Is it just that the acting game is so hard and an easy but big paycheque is them considering getting payback for their past dues and sacrifices?

Or do they just run out of acting tricks, freshness etc.? They have nothing new to bring to the table? Or do they just burn out, run out of energy to push themselves or take themselves to the edge anymore? The effort is gone?

Anyone? Anyone?


Let's talk about WHY we have Great Actors in Crap Movies.

I touched on this slightly in my first post. I think those reasons you gave are all relevant to one actor or another.

With Michael Caine, he says it himself - he wanted to keep his wife in jewellery so took pretty much every film that offered him a big paycheque. But he also acknowledges that the great roles are either for the younger actor or the much older one. When you get to 45/50 there's a good ten to twenty years of rather boring father figure roles before you start geting offered the King Lear type stuff.

And let's not forget good old fashioned ego - big stars, especially nowadays are what open a movie, they are the main draw. In a business where the opening weekend is pretty much all that matters a movie star knows that no matter how bad the movie their name alone will make it successful. A perfect recipe then, for a good actor not giving two shits about the quality of the material/director/co-stars.

Yes, I think it's a mixture of all those things mentioned: lack of worthwhile roles, a slackening of ambition, easy pay cheques and ego to keep oneself in the 'game' as it were. Plus the fact as you get older so the priority changes - work isn't the be all and end all for some. You've been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and there's nothing really left to prove. Though, to be honest, if that's the case you should do a Garbo and quit for good or at least hold out for that next good role. That's one of the reasons why I admire Paul Newman so much - okay, he's had his small share of bad movies along the way but look at the films and roles he's appeared in towards the end of his career ie. The Verdict, Road To Perdition and Nobody's Fool for instance. They contain some of his best work (especially Nobody's Fool ).Same with Michael Caine to a degree. Yes, there's been plenty of turkeys to choose from but likewise over the last decade or so he seems to have injected his career with a new lease of life and given some fine performances.

[Peven]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

[TonyWilson]

Damn straight HB, and I'd like to add that Paul Newman hasn't been mentioned here, that's quite an achievement. I've not seen all his movies but I'm hard pressed to think of an out and out turkey, whereas Caine has got a fair collection.

[TonyWilson]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

She was, tho there was that awful Joel Schumacher one about the Irish repoorter Veronica Guerin, that was a bit of a stinker. You're lucky you don't know that one actually.

[Zarles]

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

Shortly before he died, he told his biographer, Barbara Leaming, that he had spent the day "playing a toy" in a movie about toys who "do horrible things to each other." Film historian Joseph McBride quotes Welles saying of his participation: "I play a planet. I menace somebody called Something-or-other. Then I'm destroyed."

Sounds like he had a pretty firm grasp on the plot and concepts to me.

From IMDB:

"'Orson Wells' was said to have hated the movie. When asked about his role, not only could not remember his character's name, but he described his role as "a big toy who attacks a bunch of smaller toys"."

Just thought I read that Orson said the 'I don't know what a Transformer is' when asked about the movie in an interview.

[judderman]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

Really? Apart from Lotr, the Aviator and Elizabeth, can you name a single notable role she's had? Most of her films have been critical and commercial bombs. But that doesn't matter because culture has annointed her our generation's Great Actress. If only culture cut Emily Watson that much slack.

[Zarles]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

Really? Apart from Lotr, the Aviator and Elizabeth, can you name a single notable role she's had? Most of her films have been critical and commercial bombs. But that doesn't matter because culture has annointed her our generation's Great Actress. If only culture cut Emily Watson that much slack.

First off, why are you excluding LOTR, Aviator, and Elizabeth? Second, have you seen Notes On A Scandal? 87% on Rotten Tomatoes, $50 million worldwide. Doesn't seem like a bomb to me.

[Dee E. Goppstober]

When you get to 45/50 there's a good ten to twenty years of rather boring father figure roles before you start geting offered the King Lear type stuff.

I think a lot of actors go through this lull - where they have to face up to the fact that they're not the young rebel heroes of the movies anymore. They then have to either reboot their systems or keep making shit films forever.

I think in another thread (probably 1408) this was being said about John Cusack. But I bet my money on him being smart enough to reboot soon. Grace is Gone could be a good start.

[HollywoodBabylon]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

Really? Apart from Lotr, the Aviator and Elizabeth, can you name a single notable role she's had? Most of her films have been critical and commercial bombs. But that doesn't matter because culture has annointed her our generation's Great Actress. If only culture cut Emily Watson that much slack.

Have to disagree there Judderman. Blanchett is one of the best English speaking contemporary screen actresses around even if some of her movies haven't been critical or commercial successes (in the case of the latter that proves nothing. Since when has quantity meant quality?). She was excellent in movies like The Gift (the film itself was OK), Babel and Little Fish and in the upcoming Dylan biopic I'm Not There she's reputedly outstanding - no mean feat especially as she's playing a man (Dylan himself). I agree there is some degree of hype surrounding her status and that actresses like Emily Watson do deserve more recognition. However, that's not Blanchett's fault and shouldn't detract from the fact of her abilities as an actress. Plus, remember she's regarded even more as a stage actress (and is taking over the Sydney National Theatre in Australia for the next three years) and though the two crafts are very different, it's still as measure of her talent that she's so highly rated in both fields. Also, she's only in her early 30's and in my view has achieved an awful lot in acting terms in that relatively short amount of time. There's a genuine powerfulness about her acting yet also a refreshing naturalness that's both modest and completely unadorned by technicality. I think she's well on her way to becoming one of our generations finest actresses. And in my book she deserves too.

[judderman]

I wasn't disputing that she was a good actress. Indeed if she wasn't a good actress, I don't think she'd be on this thread in the first place.

[godzillasushi]

Well, maybe I make some of you mad with this but in Babel she was just complaining to Brad Pitt 75% of the movie. I know how epic it must have been having an actress nag on screen for an hour but to me that wasn't great acting. That was her in a good movie. Not a good movie because of her.

Brando is a much better suggestion than your first two...

How about Orson Welles?

He doesn't know what a Transformer is.

Shortly before he died, he told his biographer, Barbara Leaming, that he had spent the day "playing a toy" in a movie about toys who "do horrible things to each other." Film historian Joseph McBride quotes Welles saying of his participation: "I play a planet. I menace somebody called Something-or-other. Then I'm destroyed."

Sounds like he had a pretty firm grasp on the plot and concepts to me.

From IMDB:

"'Orson Wells' was said to have hated the movie. When asked about his role, not only could not remember his character's name, but he described his role as "a big toy who attacks a bunch of smaller toys"."

Just thought I read that Orson said the 'I don't know what a Transformer is' when asked about the movie in an interview.

It's fascinating to know that he was doing something he hated. And he was part of a movie that I personally love, but a movie that is utter crap compared to other animated movies of the time. Did Transformers kill Orsen I DONT KNOW WHAT A TRANSFORMER IS Welles?

It's neat to read that. I always wondered what Leonard Nemoy thought about it too. It's not like it's his shining achievement or anything but he was great it in. Maybe the best part of the entire movie. Respectable actors accepting a paycheck and then criticizing their work. *SHOCK*

[HollywoodBabylon]

Damn straight HB, and I'd like to add that Paul Newman hasn't been mentioned here, that's quite an achievement. I've not seen all his movies but I'm hard pressed to think of an out and out turkey, whereas Caine has got a fair collection.

To be honest, TW, I think I've only ever seen two Newman movies which I thought were well under par. One was called Torn Curtain which I think was directed by Hitchcock and wasn't the best of either of them (and I'm sure Julie Andrews co-starred!). The other was a disaster film called When Time Runs Out which was one of those 'it's so bad it's good' movies. But wasn't every A-list Hollywood star making one of those in the 70's?? But other than that, no, I can honestly say I haven't seen a bad Newman movie. And I think I must've watched plenty over the years on TV, Video and DVD.

[papalazeru]

A little bit different but...

are there any actors that you can forgive them for doing a bad movie or two?

Whether it was half sucky but ok or whether they were the saving Grace...like Pacino in Dick Tracy.

[minstrel]

A little bit different but...

are there any actors that you can forgive them for doing a bad movie or two?

Whether it was half sucky but ok or whether they were the saving Grace...like Pacino in Dick Tracy.

Tim Curry. I'm not saying he's a great actor, but for me, he's very watchable. He seems to elevate the crap he's in. Sometimes a movie is a real yawner, but Curry is the only thing worth watching in it.

[DaleTremont]

Cate Blanchett was doing pretty well before "The Golden Age"

Really? Apart from Lotr, the Aviator and Elizabeth, can you name a single notable role she's had? Most of her films have been critical and commercial bombs. But that doesn't matter because culture has annointed her our generation's Great Actress. If only culture cut Emily Watson that much slack.

Have to disagree there Judderman. Blanchett is one of the best English speaking contemporary screen actresses around even if some of her movies haven't been critical or commercial successes (in the case of the latter that proves nothing. Since when has quantity meant quality?). She was excellent in movies like The Gift (the film itself was OK), Babel and Little Fish and in the upcoming Dylan biopic I'm Not There she's reputedly outstanding - no mean feat especially as she's playing a man (Dylan himself). I agree there is some degree of hype surrounding her status and that actresses like Emily Watson do deserve more recognition. However, that's not Blanchett's fault and shouldn't detract from the fact of her abilities as an actress. Plus, remember she's regarded even more as a stage actress (and is taking over the Sydney National Theatre in Australia for the next three years) and though the two crafts are very different, it's still as measure of her talent that she's so highly rated in both fields. Also, she's only in her early 30's and in my view has achieved an awful lot in acting terms in that relatively short amount of time. There's a genuine powerfulness about her acting yet also a refreshing naturalness that's both modest and completely unadorned by technicality. I think she's well on her way to becoming one of our generations finest actresses. And in my book she deserves too.

overrated *whispers timidly*

it feels somewhat blasphemous to say it, but i could never get behind cate blanchett's acting style. to me, she's always too stagey, and never natural. in fact, i have no doubt that watching cate blanchett on stage would have me speechless, jaw dropped down to the floor. but when you're talking film, it's fucking distracting. the whole bit with the watery eyes, the strained voice? think back. she's pulled that in sooo many of her movies. granted, the characters are always vastly different, but the method remains the same. remember that episode of friends when joey was teaching an acting class and he revealed his big secret to master a crying scene- keep tweezers in your pocket and pull out a hair? yeah. i think cate took that episode deeply to heart.

[papalazeru]

A little bit different but...

are there any actors that you can forgive them for doing a bad movie or two?

Whether it was half sucky but ok or whether they were the saving Grace...like Pacino in Dick Tracy.

Tim Curry. I'm not saying he's a great actor, but for me, he's very watchable. He seems to elevate the crap he's in. Sometimes a movie is a real yawner, but Curry is the only thing worth watching in it.

Loaded Weapon, mistrel....

"Wwwwweee're vwwwwildurness guuurlss"

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!