|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 21, 2022 21:39:30 GMT
Like a lot of gifted American actors, Bryan Cranston really doesn't want to touch Shakespeare 
Shame. Not really sold on his excuse, but it's marginally better than that hogwash Robert Duvall said about leaving Shakespeare to the British, while Americans should do Westerns instead. Oy! I can kind of see where he's coming from where as an actor you want to put your stamp on a role/character as one of if not the "definitive" performance of a character, but at the end of the day its subjective. Which Hamlet is the "definitive" one? Olivier in 1948 film adaptation or Fiennes in 1995 on his Broadway production of Hamlet? Or someone else? Is Paul Scofield's Lear the "definitive" King Lear or perhaps Ian Holm? I think its more of a personal challenge for these actors who want to perform these classic Shakespeare roles on the biggest stages, then going to say I'm going to give the "definitive" end all be all performance of Lear or Hamlet or MacBeth, etc. These are good points, but it's not like Cranston is afraid of touching iconic roles other people have done before. He did Howard Beale from Network on stage, which was immortalised by Peter Finch's iconic Oscar-winning turn. He'd have known he'd face constant comparisons to Finch. That's why it sort if just feel like excuses for not wanting to take up the specific challenge of Shakespeare. No one wants to be part of a disaster like Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth.
And by all accounts, Cranston is a big Shakespeare fan. Which isn't surprising to me. A lot of his characters feel Shakespearan in grandeur and how he plays them (he goes big a lot), except for the language. A lot of American actors have been made to feel Shakespeare isn't for them, which is why it's so hard to find suitable, major American actors over 60 to play Lear. An actor of Cranston's talent and pedigree should be one of the easy options to pick for a suitable Lear one day, but he won't do it and hasn't done enough Shakespeare to feel comfortable doing it now. You are right, it should be about the personal challenge and showing that you can so it. Don't worry about being compared to past people who played the role. Just do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Weaver Addict on Jan 21, 2022 21:40:52 GMT
Well first of all this isn't really the right question - the "right" question is "What American especially could play Hamlet?" but.......some of these guys are not 60 yet .....but........ Basically if Pacino doesn't play it - it will be as disappointing as him not filming American Buffalo - it will be a strange omission and he has to do it on film not stage. * Kevin Kline will play Lear again and he's likely the next male Triple Crown winner beating Rylance (who also will do it) to the Emmy punch for his Blanchett TV role. I saw his Lear........it was fascinating but you could sense he'd like to come back to it. * Washington I think may not do it actually - his Macbeth is close to a Lear in his madness - but I take him at his word and he "said" he wants to do it ........and I see him doing it on stage but not film. Now of course Lear is different from Macbeth - and is a father for one thing - so we'll see. * Pacino -um............first: I don't think used the ear piece for lines in the way the gossip reported it - just that Mamet had re-written the whole first act A LOT (which basically consists of a lot of "yeah's and "uh-huh" dialog - where I think Pacino was getting cues when to improvise actually and on computer screens on-set). That story was wildly exaggerated - because he's Pacino, natch - and I saw the play twice - and he was entirely different the 2nd time and no microphones in act 2 at all. Anyhoo - his 2022 is very easy just Hunters and his the noir ensemble Sniff - I expect Lear to either be his next film.........or it doesn't happen. He isn't too old for Lear so that's good - and let's face it Pacino is the American mirror to Hopkins and Hopkins played Lear and gave the greatest performance over 80 in the last 5 years .........at a certain point Pacino is going to want something "like" that - he's been great - so much lately - but that's a different level of ambition and since he hasn't aged past the role yet it's still possible.........and Hopkins wasn't as good as McKellen's (definitive) Lear either.....if Pacino does it, I think Radford's script adaptation may stay ..........but with someone else directing. * Jeffrey Wright could do it and might.......... Fishburne as well.... Morgan Freeman wouldn't fucking dare nowadays, come on...... * Hoffman won't do Lear and he has no outlet to do it either. His attempt to win the Triple Crown rested on a production of Our Town which wouldn't have been allowed to happen by cancel culture. He is heartbreaking as a guy who seemed locked on the Triple Crown and fell off a cliff. Spacey is like that also ....... One of the most exciting ones is a Cuban actor who should have played Desi Arnaz in Being The Ricardos - he's only 51 atm but he will play and likely will be the definitive Lear (trust me) of any Hispanic unless Bardem wants to tackle it which I doubt -
the great ............... Raúl Esparza......remember that name.........  I just started to catch up on all of the Law and Order: SVU episodes that I missed (starting with Season 13) and Raul as Barba is soo good in the role - such a commanding presence on the small screen - its those beautiful, intense eyes and his voice. (swoons). I'm sure he would knock my socks off if I had the chance to see him in the theatre. fyi, he has a boyfriend! Yum. |
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,738
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jan 21, 2022 21:54:03 GMT
I can kind of see where he's coming from where as an actor you want to put your stamp on a role/character as one of if not the "definitive" performance of a character, but at the end of the day its subjective. Which Hamlet is the "definitive" one? Olivier in 1948 film adaptation or Fiennes in 1995 on his Broadway production of Hamlet? Or someone else? Is Paul Scofield's Lear the "definitive" King Lear or perhaps Ian Holm? I think its more of a personal challenge for these actors who want to perform these classic Shakespeare roles on the biggest stages, then going to say I'm going to give the "definitive" end all be all performance of Lear or Hamlet or MacBeth, etc. These are good points, but it's not like Cranston is afraid of touching iconic roles other people have done before. He did Howard Beale from Network on stage, which was immortalised by Peter Finch's iconic Oscar-winning turn. He'd have known he'd face constant comparisons to Finch. That's why it sort if just feel like excuses for not wanting to take up the specific challenge of Shakespeare. No one wants to be part of a disaster like Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth.
And by all accounts, Cranston is a big Shakespeare fan. Which isn't surprising to me. A lot of his characters feel Shakespearan in grandeur and how he plays them (he goes big a lot), except for the language. A lot of American actors have been made to feel Shakespeare isn't for them, which is why it's so hard to find suitable, major American actors over 60 to play Lear. An actor of Cranston's talent and pedigree should be one of the easy options to pick for a suitable Lear one day, but he won't do it and hasn't done enough Shakespeare to feel comfortable doing it now. You are right, it should be about the personal challenge and showing that you can so it. Don't worry about being compared to past people who played the role. Just do it. That is true, you can definitely see some Macbeth in Walter White's slow descent. I just looked up Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth..damn it closed after 10 days.  That is true that several American actors feel they can't get into that world or its not for them. But there are several examples of American actors giving great performances in Shakesperian roles. I think John Lithgow gave an acclaimed King Lear performance recently, and of course James Earl Jones. Kevin Kline, Washington, Pacino, Hoffman, Spacey in Richard III back in 2011, etc. they're not intimidated by it. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 21, 2022 22:04:34 GMT
These are good points, but it's not like Cranston is afraid of touching iconic roles other people have done before. He did Howard Beale from Network on stage, which was immortalised by Peter Finch's iconic Oscar-winning turn. He'd have known he'd face constant comparisons to Finch. That's why it sort if just feel like excuses for not wanting to take up the specific challenge of Shakespeare. No one wants to be part of a disaster like Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth.
And by all accounts, Cranston is a big Shakespeare fan. Which isn't surprising to me. A lot of his characters feel Shakespearan in grandeur and how he plays them (he goes big a lot), except for the language. A lot of American actors have been made to feel Shakespeare isn't for them, which is why it's so hard to find suitable, major American actors over 60 to play Lear. An actor of Cranston's talent and pedigree should be one of the easy options to pick for a suitable Lear one day, but he won't do it and hasn't done enough Shakespeare to feel comfortable doing it now. You are right, it should be about the personal challenge and showing that you can so it. Don't worry about being compared to past people who played the role. Just do it. That is true, you can definitely see some Macbeth in Walter White's slow descent. I just looked up Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth..damn it closed after 10 days. That is true that several American actors feel they can't get into that world or its not for them. But there are several examples of American actors giving great performances in Shakesperian roles. I think John Lithgow gave an acclaimed King Lear performance recently, and of course James Earl Jones. Kevin Kline, Washington, Pacino, Hoffman, Spacey in Richard III back in 2011, etc. they're not intimidated by it. Almost all those major American actors not intimidated by Shakespeare really had the training and early experience though, and it seems to have made all the difference. Othello was like Denzel Washington's 2nd lead stage role at Fordham in his early 20's. James Earl Jones, Kevin Kline etc were all doing Shakespeare on stage in their 20's as well. A lot of American actors leave it too late to get that training or experience. I'm reminded of Marlon Brando telling Johnny Depp in his 30's to go play Hamlet in some small theatre, and Depp would constantly talk about one day doing it in interviews.....I'm like, with what training? What experience? What stage background?You can't just wing Shakespeare, especially on stage. So it was all talk from Depp. But he probably believed his own hype at the time . But yeah, the guys who tend to become major American actors (big stars in Film, TV or both) don't have the classical training or experience. America has a lot of classically trained actors as well. Good ones. But Hollywood rarely promotes them to stardom. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 21, 2022 22:19:11 GMT
These are good points, but it's not like Cranston is afraid of touching iconic roles other people have done before. He did Howard Beale from Network on stage, which was immortalised by Peter Finch's iconic Oscar-winning turn. He'd have known he'd face constant comparisons to Finch. That's why it sort if just feel like excuses for not wanting to take up the specific challenge of Shakespeare. No one wants to be part of a disaster like Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth.
And by all accounts, Cranston is a big Shakespeare fan. Which isn't surprising to me. A lot of his characters feel Shakespearan in grandeur and how he plays them (he goes big a lot), except for the language. A lot of American actors have been made to feel Shakespeare isn't for them, which is why it's so hard to find suitable, major American actors over 60 to play Lear. An actor of Cranston's talent and pedigree should be one of the easy options to pick for a suitable Lear one day, but he won't do it and hasn't done enough Shakespeare to feel comfortable doing it now. You are right, it should be about the personal challenge and showing that you can so it. Don't worry about being compared to past people who played the role. Just do it. Only one person played Howard Beale before Cranston took a crack at it, so it's easier for an actor to find a different pathway to the character. There is still an inherent challenge, but it's only one actor who have to stack yourself against, not fifteen hundred as Cranston pointed out. Cranston knows Shakespeare. He knows Iago and Macbeth and Richard III and Hamlet probably as well, if not better, than any of us. But I think there is something to be said for an actor to have seen the same part played so many times that they feel like any avenue they personally took might be too easy to call derivative of another actor. Whereas if you take elements of Iago and Richard III and apply them to Walter White (which I am sure must have crossed his mind, if not outwardly inspired him), then you are formulating your own interpretation on a signature role by adapting those elements to something new. For what it's worth, I do think Robert Duvall was wrong in what he said about Americans tackling the Bard (although I think he definitely has merit in that Westerns are a genre that could and should be respected and venerated), but again, if an actor isn't interested in actually performing Shakespeare, I don't think that's a sign of cowardice or fear or a lack of ability. It's a shame that we probably won't get Bryan Cranston's Lear, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't see Lear-esque elements in a different role. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 21, 2022 22:39:28 GMT
These are good points, but it's not like Cranston is afraid of touching iconic roles other people have done before. He did Howard Beale from Network on stage, which was immortalised by Peter Finch's iconic Oscar-winning turn. He'd have known he'd face constant comparisons to Finch. That's why it sort if just feel like excuses for not wanting to take up the specific challenge of Shakespeare. No one wants to be part of a disaster like Kelsey Grammar's Macbeth.
And by all accounts, Cranston is a big Shakespeare fan. Which isn't surprising to me. A lot of his characters feel Shakespearan in grandeur and how he plays them (he goes big a lot), except for the language. A lot of American actors have been made to feel Shakespeare isn't for them, which is why it's so hard to find suitable, major American actors over 60 to play Lear. An actor of Cranston's talent and pedigree should be one of the easy options to pick for a suitable Lear one day, but he won't do it and hasn't done enough Shakespeare to feel comfortable doing it now. You are right, it should be about the personal challenge and showing that you can so it. Don't worry about being compared to past people who played the role. Just do it. Only one person played Howard Beale before Cranston took a crack at it, so it's easier for an actor to find a different pathway to the character. There is still an inherent challenge, but it's only one actor who have to stack yourself against, not fifteen hundred as Cranston pointed out. Cranston knows Shakespeare. He knows Iago and Macbeth and Richard III and Hamlet probably as well, if not better, than any of us. But I think there is something to be said for an actor to have seen the same part played so many times that they feel like any avenue they personally took might be too easy to call derivative of another actor. Whereas if you take elements of Iago and Richard III and apply them to Walter White (which I am sure must have crossed his mind, if not outwardly inspired him), then you are formulating your own interpretation on a signature role by adapting those elements to something new. For what it's worth, I do think Robert Duvall was wrong in what he said about Americans tackling the Bard (although I think he definitely has merit in that Westerns are a genre that could and should be respected and venerated), but again, if an actor isn't interested in actually performing Shakespeare, I don't think that's a sign of cowardice or fear or a lack of ability. It's a shame that we probably won't get Bryan Cranston's Lear, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't see Lear-esque elements in a different role. Ehh...you make some fine points, but at the end of the day, Shakespeare for actors is about the challenge. You either want to take on the challenge or you don't. Often times if you do, it will elevate your reputation beyond your peers. When Marlon Brando did Julius Ceasar to Oscar nominated effect, he pretty much proved that he could do just about anything to a high level, and that cemented his GOAT status as his career went on. On the other hand, Paul Newman's constant avoidance of Shakespeare or anything that even had the air of "classical" on film or stage limited what was a stellar reputation. Had Newman nailed a great Hamlet, he'd have been seen as a legit equal in talent to someone like Brando, instead of someone great, but somewhat more limited. It took an American Shakespearan actor in George C Scott to really come along and challenge the perception that Brando was the greatest American actor of their era in the 60's. Newman was great, but just for Newman roles. Couldn't do the classics like Brando or Scott. To the victor goes the spoils. No actor has to do Shakespeare, but I think it can elevate your reputation substantially if you do it to a high enough level. Even if you are already as celebrated as Bryan Cranston. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 21, 2022 22:40:45 GMT
Well first of all this isn't really the right question - the "right" question is "What American especially could play Hamlet?" but.......some of these guys are not 60 yet .....but........ Basically if Pacino doesn't play it - it will be as disappointing as him not filming American Buffalo - it will be a strange omission and he has to do it on film not stage. * Kevin Kline will play Lear again and he's likely the next male Triple Crown winner beating Rylance (who also will do it) to the Emmy punch for his Blanchett TV role. I saw his Lear........it was fascinating but you could sense he'd like to come back to it. * Washington I think may not do it actually - his Macbeth is close to a Lear in his madness - but I take him at his word and he "said" he wants to do it ........and I see him doing it on stage but not film. Now of course Lear is different from Macbeth - and is a father for one thing - so we'll see. * Pacino -um............first: I don't think used the ear piece for lines in the way the gossip reported it - just that Mamet had re-written the whole first act A LOT (which basically consists of a lot of "yeah's and "uh-huh" dialog - where I think Pacino was getting cues when to improvise actually and on computer screens on-set). That story was wildly exaggerated - because he's Pacino, natch - and I saw the play twice - and he was entirely different the 2nd time and no microphones in act 2 at all. Anyhoo - his 2022 is very easy just Hunters and his the noir ensemble Sniff - I expect Lear to either be his next film.........or it doesn't happen. He isn't too old for Lear so that's good - and let's face it Pacino is the American mirror to Hopkins and Hopkins played Lear and gave the greatest performance over 80 in the last 5 years .........at a certain point Pacino is going to want something "like" that - he's been great - so much lately - but that's a different level of ambition and since he hasn't aged past the role yet it's still possible.........and Hopkins wasn't as good as McKellen's (definitive) Lear either.....if Pacino does it, I think Radford's script adaptation may stay ..........but with someone else directing. * Jeffrey Wright could do it and might.......... Fishburne as well.... Morgan Freeman wouldn't fucking dare nowadays, come on...... * Hoffman won't do Lear and he has no outlet to do it either. His attempt to win the Triple Crown rested on a production of Our Town which wouldn't have been allowed to happen by cancel culture. He is heartbreaking as a guy who seemed locked on the Triple Crown and fell off a cliff. Spacey is like that also ....... One of the most exciting ones is a Cuban actor who should have played Desi Arnaz in Being The Ricardos - he's only 51 atm but he will play and likely will be the definitive Lear (trust me) of any Hispanic unless Bardem wants to tackle it which I doubt -
the great ............... Raúl Esparza......remember that name......... I just started to catch up on all of the Law and Order: SVU episodes that I missed (starting with Season 13) and Raul as Barba is soo good in the role - such a commanding presence on the small screen - its those beautiful, intense eyes and his voice. (swoons). I'm sure he would knock my socks off if I had the chance to see him in the theatre. fyi, he has a boyfriend! Yum. If you can try to see his guest starring role in Lady's Man in Law & Order: Criminal Intent (Season 8 episode 11) - it's one of my favorite things he's ever done - and he is right on the edge of going OTT but pulls it back and walks a fascinating line. It's exactly the kind of acting I like...... It's also a very sexual episode - in different ways - so I think you'll like it a lot if you haven't seen it.......  |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 21, 2022 22:48:34 GMT
Only one person played Howard Beale before Cranston took a crack at it, so it's easier for an actor to find a different pathway to the character. There is still an inherent challenge, but it's only one actor who have to stack yourself against, not fifteen hundred as Cranston pointed out. Cranston knows Shakespeare. He knows Iago and Macbeth and Richard III and Hamlet probably as well, if not better, than any of us. But I think there is something to be said for an actor to have seen the same part played so many times that they feel like any avenue they personally took might be too easy to call derivative of another actor. Whereas if you take elements of Iago and Richard III and apply them to Walter White (which I am sure must have crossed his mind, if not outwardly inspired him), then you are formulating your own interpretation on a signature role by adapting those elements to something new. For what it's worth, I do think Robert Duvall was wrong in what he said about Americans tackling the Bard (although I think he definitely has merit in that Westerns are a genre that could and should be respected and venerated), but again, if an actor isn't interested in actually performing Shakespeare, I don't think that's a sign of cowardice or fear or a lack of ability. It's a shame that we probably won't get Bryan Cranston's Lear, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't see Lear-esque elements in a different role. Ehh...you make some fine points, but at the end of the day, Shakespeare for actors is about the challenge. You either want to take on the challenge or you don't. Often times if you do, it will elevate your reputation beyond your peers. When Marlon Brando did Julius Ceasar to Oscar nominated effect, he pretty much proved that he could do just about anything to a high level, and that cemented his GOAT status as his career went on. On the other hand, Paul Newman's constant avoidance of Shakespeare or anything that even had the air of "classical" on film or stage limited what was a stellar reputation. Had Newman nailed a great Hamlet, he'd have been seen as a legit equal in talent to someone like Brando, instead of someone great, but somewhat more limited. It took an American Shakespearan actor in George C Scott to really come along and challenge the perception that Brando was the greatest American actor of their era in the 60's. Newman was great, but just for Newman roles. Couldn't do the classics like Brando or Scott. To the victor goes the spoils. No actor has to do Shakespeare, but I think it can elevate your reputation substantially if you do it to a high enough level. Even if you are already as celebrated as Bryan Cranston. Oh, of course if you're able to do Shakespeare and you hit that high level, then yeah, there's absolutely no downside to it. It is a challenge, and probably even more so to make a stamp on that role. But then I think about someone like Cranston who is getting these roles that are pretty much American incarnations of those Shakespearean roles (LBJ, Howard Beale, Walter White, hell, Hal would've fit right at home in A Midsummer Night's Dream with absolutely zero change), and I imagine that getting to take those elements that are essential tools of the trade but using them to forge new paths is even more of an exciting challenge for him. |
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Jan 22, 2022 7:59:30 GMT
Pacino and Washington are the most likely among the American actors who could and would do Lear on film.
I think maybe it's Pacino's next after this movie with Freeman and Mirren.
He's nearing 82 years old, to me it's a now or never situation.
Btw it's a bit off topic, but it's always about Shakespeare on film.
Baz Luhrmann during press for The Great Gatsby when asked how he could complete his trilogy of iconic literary characters with DiCaprio, he said "Hamlet".
Could you imagine DiCaprio in his late 40s or early 50s playing Hamlet??
I would just to watch him trying to overcome the challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 22, 2022 11:45:49 GMT
Pacino and Washington are the most likely among the American actors who could and would do Lear on film. I think maybe it's Pacino's next after this movie with Freeman and Mirren. He's nearing 82 years old, to me it's a now or never situation. Btw it's a bit off topic, but it's always about Shakespeare on film.
Baz Luhrmann during press for The Great Gatsby when asked how he could complete his trilogy of iconic literary characters with DiCaprio, he said "Hamlet".
Could you imagine DiCaprio in his late 40s or early 50s playing Hamlet??
I would just to watch him trying to overcome the challenge. physically just evoked Hamlet so perfectly but the time has passed to play it - if he was going to do it....... it would have been in his late 20s or 30s. If you want to see why people woould talk about him as Hamlet - watch the Richard Burton Hamlet on Youtube where the idea of "the actor as Rock star" really came into the popular lexicon and how DiCaprio - at the peak of his youthful celebrity - evokes the same thing in an American way. Hamlet is to many "the" great role not Lear though Lear is a role you grow into and Hamlet is the role you are never ready for - which is why I said that in my first post - the better question is really "who could "be" Hamlet?" - particularly an American....though that thread wouldn't have as many names to talk about...........or be much fun. DiCaprio hasn't done theater so I think that window and his level of fame have closed that off for him - so he'll end up like Nicholson (and somewhat De Niro) with a movie resume punctuated with maybe some TV later - which is fine not everyone "has" to do stage work or Shakespeare - I mean Daniel Day-Lewis won 3 Oscars only after he walked off a stage and never looked back on a stage again  ............a lot of people think of DDL as the GOAT (not me but he's pretty close).............. in America De Niro, Nicholson are legit GOAT actors who either did very little theater (De Niro) or none (Nicholson) and with 0 Shakespeare roles in ANY medium.Btw this thread has gone a little off the raiis in that way - lots of talk about Bryan Cranston NOT doing Shakespeare - so who really gives a shit about Cranston in this specific sphere anyway - except to mock him for not doing it? I am a big Cranston fan and I saw his Howard Beale and he was superb (I reviewed it on MAR) but we're only discussing him because he has 2 Tony's not because anyone really wants to see him play Lear or associates him with King Lear anyway. At least with DiCaprio you have to say he actually did Shakespeare on film already.....who knows where he'll be when when he's older? Anyway not yet mentioned and probably the guy who is really #1 along with Rylance to play Lear- even more than Pacino and Washington are maybe - Ralph Fiennes - who I saw play Hamlet on stage in the best performance I've seen on stage - not the best Hamlet, or best Shakespeare but THE best performance - period. Anybody who knows my posts knows I never say there's a " greatest male performance on film" but onstage ........it was him and I've seen a lot ......... Fiennes will certainly play Lear....... He turns 60 this December:
 n
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 22, 2022 21:42:36 GMT
Ralph Fiennes was mentioned in the first post on this thread 
|
|
|
|
Post by Weaver Addict on Jan 23, 2022 14:19:36 GMT
I just started to catch up on all of the Law and Order: SVU episodes that I missed (starting with Season 13) and Raul as Barba is soo good in the role - such a commanding presence on the small screen - its those beautiful, intense eyes and his voice. (swoons). I'm sure he would knock my socks off if I had the chance to see him in the theatre. fyi, he has a boyfriend! Yum. If you can try to see his guest starring role in Lady's Man in Law & Order: Criminal Intent (Season 8 episode 11) - it's one of my favorite things he's ever done - and he is right on the edge of going OTT but pulls it back and walks a fascinating line. It's exactly the kind of acting I like...... It's also a very sexual episode - in different ways - so I think you'll like it a lot if you haven't seen it.......  Raul? sexual episode? In like flint. Thanks Pacino dude. |
|
wonky
Full Member
Posts: 596 
Likes: 713
|
Post by wonky on Jan 26, 2022 8:03:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 26, 2022 8:22:11 GMT
That's a great quote - in bold - basically a lot of the actors we talk about as "the best" have roughly 7 performances - at most, sometimes its like 5 (um) - like that ...........I once talked about how all actors - Brando, Day-Lewis, Nicholson, Hopkins etc whomever you think was THE best - basically get reduced by the public to 5-7 performances anyway........... because the only time "typical" people really spend to dissect a performance are in each actor's obvious ones............ Really loved that analogy to boxing. |
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,738
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Feb 4, 2022 0:14:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 0:30:06 GMT
Damn....knew it!  . Not wasting any time is he. GOAT things He'll do a film version as well as a stage version. Poor Pacino really needs to get cracking on his version, because I think it'll be hard for him to get investors if Denzel has a film version ready to shoot in the next year or two. |
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,738
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Feb 4, 2022 0:38:17 GMT
Damn....knew it! . Not wasting any time is he. GOAT things He'll do a film version as well as a stage version. Poor Pacino really needs to get cracking on his version, because I think it'll be hard for him to get investors if Denzel has a film version ready to shoot in the next year or two. Yep, you snooze you lose. It’s about the roles you do..and the roles you don’t do! Wonder who he’ll get to direct both the stage and film projects? |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 1:01:07 GMT
Damn....knew it! . Not wasting any time is he. GOAT things He'll do a film version as well as a stage version. Poor Pacino really needs to get cracking on his version, because I think it'll be hard for him to get investors if Denzel has a film version ready to shoot in the next year or two. Yep, you snooze you lose. It’s about the roles you do..and the roles you don’t do! Wonder who he’ll get to direct both the stage and film projects? Truth. Pacino wasted too much time. He should have least have done it on stage while he had the stamina and didn't have any memory issues. Oh well. Here's hoping he does manage to get his film version off the ground at some point, but it'll be much easier for Denzel to get his made since he's a much more bankable commodity in the industry and The Tragedy Of Macbeth has been so widely acclaimed. It would be good if Denzel roped Joel Coen back into directing his King Lear film, but I suspect Coen might be one and done with Shakespeare, as successful as Macbeth was. I'm thinking, especially because he's relevant again as an artistic force with Belfast, that Denzel might rope in his old Much Ado About Nothing director Kenneth Branagh to direct the stage version, film version or both. That would be a major get if he got Branagh to do it. Branagh might feel a but weird about directing Denzel as Lear before he's had the chance to play him though. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 4, 2022 1:06:12 GMT
How about Sam Mendes?
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 1:12:32 GMT
Good call. He directs both stage and film, so he could do both. But he may be booked already. We know Denzel has been talking to some top directors about projects to do together. And as Joel Coen proved, you don't need to have directed Shakespeare before to make a great film version of it. I do wonder if one of the guys he's mentioned talking to ( Paul Thomas Anderson, Steve Mcqueen, Alfonso Cuaron might be in the frame for the film version at least). I think with Barry Jenkins visual style, he could make a beautiful looking Lear film as well. And Jenkins is also a director on Denzel's speed dial. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 1:19:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Feb 4, 2022 11:03:49 GMT
Poor Pacino, i was rooting for him to play King Lear as his last great role on film.
Anyway, i'm not mad about Denzel taking over him.
In terms of a film version, i'd speculate on these directors:
Martin Scorsese
Barry Jenkins
Steve McQueen
Alfonso Cuaron
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 4, 2022 11:47:43 GMT
Poor Pacino, i was rooting for him to play King Lear as his last great role in film. Well........... People say they want to do stuff all the time and they don't or things happen and come up .........I mean what if Washington gets a really good 14th cop script or he really likes the ideas for Equalizer 4, 5, 6 ......... On the other hand - let's see how close this is - and if this happens I suppose then - Mark Rylance and Branagh - would be slightly even more annoyed than Pacino........Pacino just likes to talk and talk and talk and ruminate on work endlessly - he's had plenty of time to do it if he wanted it, tough break, way it goes Al..............but Branagh and Rylance have big reps in Shakespeare specifically and are 60+ now ................ a Washington film version by 2024 (far more likely btw) - particularly a well received one knocks them both out on film. I actually think Pacino is somewhat more "bothered" - so to speak - by what Anthony Hopkins did in The Father - which Pacino slightly touched on in a lesser way in Paterno (2018) and was played on stage by an actor who is "like" Al Pacino - (Frank Langella) who won a Tony .......... Pacino has had a great late 5 year run starting w/ Paterno - in the 2010s he was 1 of just 4 men to get nodded for an Emmy, Oscar, Tony (w/ Cranston, Driver and Rylance).........but I think knowing his acting history that Hopkins gets under his skin a bit...... There has been a kernel of a late career Pacino-Hopkins rivalry (there's also a late career Hopkins-McKellen one), now Pacino-Hopkins are friends, they're obviously GOATs, close in age and acting histories............. and Hopkins also played Lear in the last 5 years..........if you just watch Hopkins Lear and Pacino's Paterno - they're similar in many, many ways and also both are "greatish but not overwhelmingly GREAT" but Hopkins took his (TV) Lear and processed it into the overwhelmingly GREAT - all-timer - The Father....... Pacino hasn't found anything to do the same thing with.................yet?  |
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,738
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Feb 4, 2022 16:42:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Feb 4, 2022 17:04:29 GMT
Pacino.-
Also Helen Mirren, if the sexes are changed.-
Denzel could be, Just he is in serious danger of become the Charlton Heston of the 70s.-
|
|
............a lot of people think of DDL as the GOAT (not me but he's pretty close).............. in America De Niro, Nicholson are legit GOAT actors who either did very little theater (De Niro) or none (Nicholson) and with 0 Shakespeare roles in ANY medium.
. 
