|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 9, 2019 5:25:32 GMT
Thanks ! For me maybe one of Swayze's biggest career mistakes was not commiting fully to the action genre when the oppourtunity was there (the same way another good actor like Wesley Snipes did, while also mixing it up with other stuff). I understand why....he had huge hits outside the genre like Ghost and Dirty Dancing, and maybe wanted to avoid typecasting as an action guy, but when he had two action flicks like Point Break and Roadhouse in his back pocket, fans of the genre would have likely stuck with him for a long time if he stayed really commited to the genre. As you said by the time he came back to action films much later with Black Dog, his career had been failing in other genres (comedies, dramas and family films like Tall Tale), and yeah, it really did seem like a desperate cry for relevancy for a guy whose star had begun to plummet drastically since the early 90"s. His greatest strengths as an actor were being a romantic lead and being a convincing ass kicker, and for some insane reason he spent years of his career in the 90's avoiding doing the two things he was really, really good at. Fine actor, but he should have left the would-be Oscarbait to Tom Hanks or whomever. But he has a nice little set/run of action films from the 80's and early 90's that I consider top notch for the genre. Yeah, he really should have jumped on the action-train more when he had the chance. To me his career is lot like a predecessor for the Nicolas Cage action types that would dominate much of the late 1990s. Not so much physically imposing, and buff, as they came off more realistic and relatable, but Swayze never got to that feel that same kind of success. He seemed more intent on being a really dramatic actor, and or avoiding any action related roles as much as he could. While I appreciated Swayze's attempt to stretch "his legs", so to speak, he really worked best as the "tough attractive guy!" In many ways, I actual would argue that I think he was ahead of his time. Yeah, I can see the Cage similarities, except because of his dance background, Swayze could effectively mimic the dynamic movements of a trained Martial Artist like Segal or Chuck Norris, in a way Cage could not. Cage would need a lot of stunt doubles to pull off something like Roadhouse, wheras you know Swayze is doing most of those moves himself. You don't need to cheat in the close-ups with Swayze, which was always the thrill about having real martial artists as action stars. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 9, 2019 5:43:13 GMT
Yeah, he really should have jumped on the action-train more when he had the chance. To me his career is lot like a predecessor for the Nicolas Cage action types that would dominate much of the late 1990s. Not so much physically imposing, and buff, as they came off more realistic and relatable, but Swayze never got to that feel that same kind of success. He seemed more intent on being a really dramatic actor, and or avoiding any action related roles as much as he could. While I appreciated Swayze's attempt to stretch "his legs", so to speak, he really worked best as the "tough attractive guy!" In many ways, I actual would argue that I think he was ahead of his time. Yeah, I can see the Cage similarities, except because of his dance background, Swayze could effectively mimic the dynamic movements of a trained Martial Artist like Segal or Chuck Norris, in a way Cage could not. Cage would need a lot of stunt doubles to pull off something like Roadhouse, wheras you know Swayze is doing most of those moves himself. You don't need to cheat in the close-ups with Swayze, which was always the thrill about having real martial artists as action stars. Oh yes, Swayze was a dancer, so he did most of his stunts. Cage was more of a professional actor, so he'd relied a lot more on stuntman, although Cage did his fair share of physical work as well. Swayze's dancing skills definitely played a big part in why he was made for action. He was very physical, so roles like Road House suited him well. |
|
|
|
Post by fiosnasiob on Aug 9, 2019 19:04:46 GMT
Wanted to do a modern American actress in the crime-drama genre, I first went for my 90's crush Ashley Judd who has made a good deal of her career in this genre but finally went for La Sarandon who I feel has been stronger in this genre, well, 4 of her 5 oscars leading roles nominations were more or less in this genre, so, she wins. She really shones playing in both sides of the laws, perfect as the drug-dealer boss in Paul Schrader's underated Light Sleeper or as the young, struggling waitress who crosses paths with an ageing gangster (a brillant Burt Lancaster) in Atlantic City. She completely steal the show as the strong, courageous lawyer in The Client and as Sister Helen Prejean, the nun who befriended a murderer and a rapist bound for a lethal injection, she's able to display a natural fragility and vulnerability like few others. And let's not forget her iconic and exceptional turn in the crime classic Thelma & Louise. With Paul Newman (and Gene Hackman isn't far) in Twilight, not a great crime film but a pleasure to watch these great actors together.  |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 9, 2019 21:11:09 GMT
Wanted to do a modern American actress in the crime-drama genre, I first went for my 90's crush Ashley Judd who has made a good deal of her career in this genre but finally went for La Sarandon who I feel has been stronger in this genre, well, 4 of her 5 oscars leading roles nominations were more or less in this genre, so, she wins. She really shones playing in both sides of the laws, perfect as the drug-dealer boss in Paul Schrader's underated Light Sleeper or as the young, struggling waitress who crosses paths with an ageing gangster (a brillant Burt Lancaster) in Atlantic City. She completely steal the show as the strong, courageous lawyer in The Client and as Sister Helen Prejean, the nun who befriended a murderer and a rapist bound for a lethal injection, she's able to display a natural fragility and vulnerability like few others. And let's not forget her iconic and exceptional turn in the crime classic Thelma & Louise. With Paul Newman (and Gene Hackman isn't far) in Twilight, not a great crime film but a pleasure to watch these great actors together. You are right here. I don't explicitly associate Sarandon with the crime genre, but when you break down her movies like that, she absolutely was a dominant actress in the genre. I think maybe because in a lot of her films which could be defined as crime , she's not playing a typical crime film protagonist (ie a victim fighting back, a cop, a criminal, a femme fatale). A waitress and a Nun are not your typical crime movie protagonists. She's a truly Great screen actress though. In some ways, another victim of the Streep phenomena, where only one actress of that era is elevated above all as a Goddess Of Acting, while her peers are a almost treated as being merely "good". Jessica Lange was given the most screen time and focus in Feud: Bette And Joan, but I thought Sarandon as Bette Davis gave the better performance. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 10, 2019 1:32:05 GMT
Wanted to do a modern American actress in the crime-drama genre, I first went for my 90's crush Ashley Judd who has made a good deal of her career in this genre but finally went for La Sarandon who I feel has been stronger in this genre, well, 4 of her 5 oscars leading roles nominations were more or less in this genre, so, she wins. She really shones playing in both sides of the laws, perfect as the drug-dealer boss in Paul Schrader's underated Light Sleeper or as the young, struggling waitress who crosses paths with an ageing gangster (a brillant Burt Lancaster) in Atlantic City. She completely steal the show as the strong, courageous lawyer in The Client and as Sister Helen Prejean, the nun who befriended a murderer and a rapist bound for a lethal injection, she's able to display a natural fragility and vulnerability like few others. And let's not forget her iconic and exceptional turn in the crime classic Thelma & Louise. With Paul Newman (and Gene Hackman isn't far) in Twilight, not a great crime film but a pleasure to watch these great actors together. You are right here. I don't explicitly associate Sarandon with the crime genre, but when you break down her movies like that, she absolutely was a dominant actress in the genre. I think maybe because in a lot of her films which could be defined as crime , she's not playing a typical crime film protagonist (ie a victim fighting back, a cop, a criminal, a femme fatale). A waitress and a Nun are not your typical crime movie protagonists. She's a truly Great screen actress though. In some ways, another victim of the Streep phenomena, where only one actress of that era is elevated above all as a Goddess Of Acting, while her peers are a almost treated as being merely "good". Jessica Lange was given the most screen time and focus in Feud: Bette And Joan, but I thought Sarandon as Bette Davis gave the better performance. Sarandon was an extremely respected actress in her day, however her Oscar love coincidentally seem to have run out after she actually won the gold statue. I wonder if the lack of great roles after had something to do with that. You mentioned crime, and one film of hers in that genre technically, that I was taken aback by Paul Schrader's Light Sleeper, the third film in his supposed trilogy about alienated night workers. Sarandon is really good as a drug supplier, who gives Willem Dafoe his "due", in a role where she has to be both "bad", and surprisingly sympathetic, given her position and job. It's the kind of performance, that makes you really appreciate a well-written female role. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 10, 2019 2:00:03 GMT
You are right here. I don't explicitly associate Sarandon with the crime genre, but when you break down her movies like that, she absolutely was a dominant actress in the genre. I think maybe because in a lot of her films which could be defined as crime , she's not playing a typical crime film protagonist (ie a victim fighting back, a cop, a criminal, a femme fatale). A waitress and a Nun are not your typical crime movie protagonists. She's a truly Great screen actress though. In some ways, another victim of the Streep phenomena, where only one actress of that era is elevated above all as a Goddess Of Acting, while her peers are a almost treated as being merely "good". Jessica Lange was given the most screen time and focus in Feud: Bette And Joan, but I thought Sarandon as Bette Davis gave the better performance. Sarandon was an extremely respected actress in her day, however her Oscar love coincidentally seem to have run out after she actually won the gold statue. I wonder if the lack of great roles after had something to do with that. Indeed she was extremely respected. To s certain extent, she still is (her politics seem to annoy some people though). I don't buy the thought process of great roles drying up after her Oscar Win.I'd argue her career has been better since her Oscar Win. Her main problem is she's not Streep, therefore she can't get nominated for sitting on a toilet bowel for 2 hours. If she was Streep, I'd argue that many of these post Oscar win films could have put her in contention for a nomination again; TwilightStepmomAnywhere But HereIgby Goes DownMoonlight MileShall We DanceAlfieElizabethtownBernard And DorisIn The Valley Of ElahEnchantedSolitary ManThe Lovely BonesJeff Who Lives At HomeArbitrageThe Company You KeepCloud AtlasThe Last Of Robin HoodThe Life And Death John F Donavon
These are not chockful of masterpieces or whatever, but it's a damned solid list of movies Sarandon has made since her Oscar Win. I'm not saying she should have gotten Oscar attention for all or most of these projects, but if she had Streep's fascination from the Academy, she could probably have scored a nomination for half those films, especially in typically weaker supporting categories. Sarandon may be the one American film actress of Streep's generation, who still maintained a fairly strong film career along side Streep. But awards bodies don't get hyped by her work, which remains consistently good. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 2:05:06 GMT
Sarandon was an extremely respected actress in her day, however her Oscar love coincidentally seem to have run out after she actually won the gold statue. I wonder if the lack of great roles after had something to do with that. Indeed she was extremely respected. To s certain extent, she still is (her politics seem to annoy some people though). I don't buy the thought process of great roles drying up after her Oscar Win.I'd argue her career had been better since her Oscar Win. Her main problem is she's not Streep, therefore she can't get nominated for sitting on a toilet bowel for 2 hours. If she was Streep, I'd argue that many of these post Oscar win films could have put her in contention for a nomination again; Twilight Stepmom Anywhere But Here Igby Goes Down Moonlight Mile Shall We Dance Alfie Elizabethtown Bernard And DorisIn The Valley Of Elah Enchanted Solitary Man The Lovely Bones Jeff Who Lives At Home Arbitrage The Company You Keep Cloud Atlas The Last Of Robin Hood The Life And Death John F Donavon These are not chockful of masterpieces or whatever, but it's a damned solid list of movies Sarandon has made since her Oscar Win. I'm not saying she should have gotten Oscar attention for all or most of these projects, but if she had Streep's fascination from the Academy, she could probably have scored a nomination for half those films, especially in typically weaker supporting categories. Sarandon may be the one American film actress of Streep's generation, who still maintained a fairly strong film career along side Streep. But awards bodies don't get hyped by her work, which remains consistently good. Hm... I doubt that even Streep could be nominated for a television film. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 10, 2019 2:17:12 GMT
Indeed she was extremely respected. To s certain extent, she still is (her politics seem to annoy some people though). I don't buy the thought process of great roles drying up after her Oscar Win.I'd argue her career had been better since her Oscar Win. Her main problem is she's not Streep, therefore she can't get nominated for sitting on a toilet bowel for 2 hours. If she was Streep, I'd argue that many of these post Oscar win films could have put her in contention for a nomination again; Twilight Stepmom Anywhere But Here Igby Goes Down Moonlight Mile Shall We Dance Alfie Elizabethtown Bernard And DorisIn The Valley Of Elah Enchanted Solitary Man The Lovely Bones Jeff Who Lives At Home Arbitrage The Company You Keep Cloud Atlas The Last Of Robin Hood The Life And Death John F Donavon These are not chockful of masterpieces or whatever, but it's a damned solid list of movies Sarandon has made since her Oscar Win. I'm not saying she should have gotten Oscar attention for all or most of these projects, but if she had Streep's fascination from the Academy, she could probably have scored a nomination for half those films, especially in typically weaker supporting categories. Sarandon may be the one American film actress of Streep's generation, who still maintained a fairly strong film career along side Streep. But awards bodies don't get hyped by her work, which remains consistently good. Hm... I doubt that even Streep could be nominated for a television film. I know, but Bernard And Doris was originally intended as a cinema release before being purchased by HBO, so I thought it merited inclusion as a great film role post-Oscar win.Similar to Grace Of Monaco which was supposed to be an Oscar vehicle for Kidman that ended up as a TV accqisition. It's a grey area.I still think of them as originally being movies, not television productions. So yeah, point still stands. Given the strength and longevity of her film career, she should arguably be the Bette Davis or Ingrid Bergman to Streep's Katherine Hepburn, yet somehow she isn't percieved in that light. Streep's insane (and frankly unjustified) Oscar record has really unbalanced the perception of other actresses, particularly of her era. Unfairly so, imho. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 10, 2019 2:37:51 GMT
Sarandon was an extremely respected actress in her day, however her Oscar love coincidentally seem to have run out after she actually won the gold statue. I wonder if the lack of great roles after had something to do with that. Indeed she was extremely respected. To s certain extent, she still is (her politics seem to annoy some people though). I don't buy the thought process of great roles drying up after her Oscar Win.I'd argue her career has been better since her Oscar Win. Her main problem is she's not Streep, therefore she can't get nominated for sitting on a toilet bowel for 2 hours. If she was Streep, I'd argue that many of these post Oscar win films could have put her in contention for a nomination again; TwilightStepmomAnywhere But HereIgby Goes DownMoonlight MileShall We DanceAlfieElizabethtownBernard And DorisIn The Valley Of ElahEnchantedSolitary ManThe Lovely BonesJeff Who Lives At HomeArbitrageThe Company You KeepCloud AtlasThe Last Of Robin HoodThe Life And Death John F Donavon
These are not chockful of masterpieces or whatever, but it's a damned solid list of movies Sarandon has made since her Oscar Win. I'm not saying she should have gotten Oscar attention for all or most of these projects, but if she had Streep's fascination from the Academy, she could probably have scored a nomination for half those films, especially in typically weaker supporting categories. Sarandon may be the one American film actress of Streep's generation, who still maintained a fairly strong film career along side Streep. But awards bodies don't get hyped by her work, which remains consistently good. Oh yes, now that I think about it I'm surprised she never got a sixth nomination (her recent cuckoo politics probably don't help either, but I digress), I seem to remember her getting some awards love for Igby Goes Down, and thinking that there was predictions of her being nominated for her performance as a "raging mother", but it never actually came to fruition. It also probably doesn't help that most of her work post Dead Man Walking, but has been a lot less showy. Like she's great in, In The Valley of Etah, but it's not the kind of performance, that makes people shout and cheer, because of how moved they were by it, or something. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 10, 2019 3:08:45 GMT
Indeed she was extremely respected. To s certain extent, she still is (her politics seem to annoy some people though). I don't buy the thought process of great roles drying up after her Oscar Win.I'd argue her career has been better since her Oscar Win. Her main problem is she's not Streep, therefore she can't get nominated for sitting on a toilet bowel for 2 hours. If she was Streep, I'd argue that many of these post Oscar win films could have put her in contention for a nomination again; TwilightStepmomAnywhere But HereIgby Goes DownMoonlight MileShall We DanceAlfieElizabethtownBernard And DorisIn The Valley Of ElahEnchantedSolitary ManThe Lovely BonesJeff Who Lives At HomeArbitrageThe Company You KeepCloud AtlasThe Last Of Robin HoodThe Life And Death John F Donavon
These are not chockful of masterpieces or whatever, but it's a damned solid list of movies Sarandon has made since her Oscar Win. I'm not saying she should have gotten Oscar attention for all or most of these projects, but if she had Streep's fascination from the Academy, she could probably have scored a nomination for half those films, especially in typically weaker supporting categories. Sarandon may be the one American film actress of Streep's generation, who still maintained a fairly strong film career along side Streep. But awards bodies don't get hyped by her work, which remains consistently good. Oh yes, now that I think about it I'm surprised she never got a sixth nomination (her recent cuckoo politics probably don't help either, but I digress), I seem to remember her getting some awards love for Igby Goes Down, and thinking that there was predictions of her being nominated for her performance as a "raging mother", but it never actually came to fruition. It also probably doesn't help that most of her work post Dead Man Walking, but has been a lot less showy. Like she's great in, In The Valley of Etah, but it's not the kind of performance, that makes people shout and cheer, because of how moved they were by it, or something. I really thought she deserved a supporting actress nomination for Arbitrage alongside Richard Gere. To be honest, if the Academy liked her more, I feel she could comfortably be on double digit nominations on supporting roles alone post her Oscar Win. Especially when you look at some of the supporting nods they hand out to a current favorites like Amy Adams and Octavia Spencer, as if supporting actress nominations are candy floss. Though in fairness those two ladies tend to coattails on being in Best Picture nominees. Sarandon does have quite an abrasive and confrontational personality (to go with her politics), so I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't exactly endear her to awards voters who could have thrown her easy nominations if she was warmer in real life.. Vanessa Redgrave is another great actress whose personality and politics probably curtailed her awards season love as her career went on. It helps not to be too abrasive or confrontational like Streep or Dench, especially if you are a woman. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 10, 2019 3:50:54 GMT
Oh yes, now that I think about it I'm surprised she never got a sixth nomination (her recent cuckoo politics probably don't help either, but I digress), I seem to remember her getting some awards love for Igby Goes Down, and thinking that there was predictions of her being nominated for her performance as a "raging mother", but it never actually came to fruition. It also probably doesn't help that most of her work post Dead Man Walking, but has been a lot less showy. Like she's great in, In The Valley of Etah, but it's not the kind of performance, that makes people shout and cheer, because of how moved they were by it, or something. I really thought she deserved a supporting actress nomination for Arbitrage alongside Richard Gere. To be honest, if the Academy liked her more, I feel she could comfortably be on double digit nominations on supporting roles alone post her Oscar Win. Especially when you look at some of the supporting nods they hand out to a current favorites like Amy Adams and Octavia Spencer, as if supporting actress nominations are candy floss. Though in fairness those two ladies tend to coattails on being in Best Picture nominees. Sarandon does have quite an abrasive and confrontational personality (to go with her politics), so I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't exactly endear her to awards voters who could have thrown her easy nominations if she was warmer in real life.. Vanessa Redgrave is another great actress whose personality and politics probably curtailed her awards season love as her career went on. It helps not to be too abrasive or confrontational like Streep or Dench, especially if you are a woman. I'm sure her later-day personality was a big turn-off for the academy, and that could explain the lack of recent nominations as well, because there are some performances she's done in recent years that would have been considered much more Oscar-worthy had they been made back in the early 1990s, such as Arbitrage for example. The academy is extremely political-minded, so getting all up and arms about something is a big no-no for them. In comparison, somebody like Streep knows how to play it more safe. Sarandon doesn't have that kind of luck or foresight however. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 10, 2019 8:41:59 GMT
Richard GereGenre: Romance (Drama & Comedy)Gere tends to rub a lot of people up the wrong way. Particularly men. We'll get into the whys of that, but I have to say that Gere is a very good actor. Whisper it quietly, but he may even be a Great Actor. In that limited sense that many of our best movie stars may be. You don't ask Humphrey Bogart or Paul Newman to play Shakespeare. They haven't got the range. But as Pauline Kael said, cast in the right role suited to their specific talents, these men (Bogart and Newman) could be peerless.
One could almost make a similar argument for Gere. Don't dress him up in Medeival Armour and have him pretend to be a Knight Of The Round Table as he did in First Knight (badly miscast as Lancelot opposite Sean Connery's King Arthur). He just looks silly. He's a uniquely American and contemporary actor, and tends to only work in those contexts.
But he's arguably the greatest Romantic Leading Man in the history of Hollywood film. You have Rudolph Valentino, Cary Grant....and that line of succession takes you to Richard Gere. Grant has the bigger and better reputation, and was certainly a far superior screwball comedian, but did he have Gere's sexual edge...I'd argue not.
From Days Of Heaven to Yanks to American Gigolo to An Officer And A Gentleman, Gere was often well cast as smooth cads in Romantic Dramas who got the girl (we hate him already!!!!). But he could apply that smoothie charm in a lighter context to Romantic Comedies like Pretty Woman, Runaway Bride and Shall We Dance.
In modern times, arguably no male star has reveled in his looks and seductiveness to the opposite sex as much as Gere. And that's why I suspect some men (Because women have always loved him) find it tough to root for the guy. Hollywood is filled with extremely good looking and charismatic leading men...but they do things to make them more relatable to the average guy. Leonardo DiCaprio started playing would-be tough guys with goatees in Scorsese films and other pictures. Johnny Depp played weirdos and outcasts. Even when they tried to mould Brad Pitt into another romantic female fantasy figure like Gere, he would often rebel and play scuzzy nutjobs in things like Kalifornia and Fight Club. If some men struggled to relate to these pretty boys who girls swooned over, they worked hard to win them over. Even George Clooney, whom the media have tried to anoint as the Great Romantic Leading Man Of Our Time, plays a lot of strange goofballs for the Coen Brothers and in other films, to offset his whole suave ladies man vibe.
Gere rarely went in for any of that, despite the odd (and successful) detour into macho psychos like Internal Affairs. So to most guys, he remains that smug bastard most likely to steal your girl. But damn if he isn't great at it! Below, Gere sweeping Debra Winger off her feet in an iconic scene from An Officer And A Gentleman:
|
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 11, 2019 0:36:48 GMT
Great write-up. Richard Gere is considered such a classically handsome man, that he fits really well into the romance genre. He generally has pretty good chemistry with his co-stars too.
The ironic part is that for much of the 80s Gere tried to runaway from the label of being a romantic leading man, and tried to do different roles, and wound-up being considered washed-up. Heck when he was cast in Pretty Woman, everyone was sure it was going to bomb because of his involvement. That's how much of an stigma he had become by that point.
I really like Gere, and I think people undervalue him not just as a romantic leading man, but also an actor in general, where more often then he seems to be criticized for being miscast in every other role he does (that's not 100% untrue). Edward Norton's performance in Primal Fear gets the share of that film's praise, but I also thought that Gere was more then up to the part of being a challenge to his character. Similarly while Pretty Woman is generally looked as Julia Roberts' big star breakout role, people shouldn't forget Gere who provides the movie with some of its best moments. He's a very solid actor, especially in the right roles, of which romance has to be at the top.
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 11, 2019 1:32:12 GMT
Great write-up. Richard Gere is considered such a classically handsome man, that he fits really well into the romance genre. He generally has pretty good chemistry with his co-stars too. The ironic part is that for much of the 80s Gere tried to runaway from the label of being a romantic leading man, and tried to do different roles, and wound-up being considered washed-up. Heck when he was cast in Pretty Woman, everyone was sure it was going to bomb because of his involvement. That's how much of an stigma he had become by that point. I really like Gere, and I think people undervalue him not just as a romantic leading man, but also an actor in general, where more often then he seems to be criticized for being miscast in every other role he does (that's not 100% untrue). Edward Norton's performance in Primal Fear gets the share of that film's praise, but I also thought that Gere was more then up to the part of being a challenge to his character. Similarly while Pretty Woman is generally looked as Julia Roberts' big star breakout role, people shouldn't forget Gere who provides the movie with some of its best moments. He's a very solid actor, especially in the right roles, of which romance has to be at the top. You are right. After Breathless Gere spent most of the 80's avoiding those romantic lead roles and he was flopping all over the place. And yes, he can be a very good actor outside of his obvious romance niche. Especially as he's gotten older and out of necessity can't play the romance part, he's put in some good dramatic and character performances in things like Arbitrage and The Hoax. Intermal Affairs is one of his stronger performances as well. A solid, underrated actor who really excels in one particular genre. Not gonna lie though...he has been miscast a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 11, 2019 2:08:51 GMT
Great write-up. Richard Gere is considered such a classically handsome man, that he fits really well into the romance genre. He generally has pretty good chemistry with his co-stars too. The ironic part is that for much of the 80s Gere tried to runaway from the label of being a romantic leading man, and tried to do different roles, and wound-up being considered washed-up. Heck when he was cast in Pretty Woman, everyone was sure it was going to bomb because of his involvement. That's how much of an stigma he had become by that point. I really like Gere, and I think people undervalue him not just as a romantic leading man, but also an actor in general, where more often then he seems to be criticized for being miscast in every other role he does (that's not 100% untrue). Edward Norton's performance in Primal Fear gets the share of that film's praise, but I also thought that Gere was more then up to the part of being a challenge to his character. Similarly while Pretty Woman is generally looked as Julia Roberts' big star breakout role, people shouldn't forget Gere who provides the movie with some of its best moments. He's a very solid actor, especially in the right roles, of which romance has to be at the top. You are right. After Breathless Gere spent most of the 80's avoiding those romantic lead roles and he was flopping all over the place. And yes, he can be a very good actor outside of his obvious romance niche. Especially as he's gotten older and out of necessity can't play the romance part, he's put in some good dramatic and character performances in things like Arbitrage and The Hoax. Intermal Affairs is one of his stronger performances as well. A solid, underrated actor who really excels in one particular genre. Not gonna lie though...he has been miscast a lot. is the sort of the film that unfairly fell under the radar, but it's actually pretty good, and Gere is really good as a "fraud", who almost pulled off a huge scheme, fooling the world into believing he knew who Howard Hughes was. That's a movie I recommend more people checking out. I think Gere was just afraid of being typecasted, which admittedly I can understand, but the dude's personality on filmed just screamed "romantic lead", take him out of that equation, and the results vary a lot more. His best and or more successful film generally have him playing off an actress, whether it's Julia Roberts, Debra Winger, or heck even Jodie Foster (I like Sommersby a lot). After Breathless, Gere played a half-English-Latin doctor, a musician, and a historical king, and he wasn't really cut out for any of the roles (he was especially brutally miscast as the Latin doctor in Beyond The Limit). I think even Gere eventually realized this, as he eventually went back to the Romantic genre, and didn't seem to regret it at all, and aside from a few missteps, his career has been a lot better for it. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 11, 2019 2:35:41 GMT
You are right. After Breathless Gere spent most of the 80's avoiding those romantic lead roles and he was flopping all over the place. And yes, he can be a very good actor outside of his obvious romance niche. Especially as he's gotten older and out of necessity can't play the romance part, he's put in some good dramatic and character performances in things like Arbitrage and The Hoax. Intermal Affairs is one of his stronger performances as well. A solid, underrated actor who really excels in one particular genre. Not gonna lie though...he has been miscast a lot. is the sort of the film that unfairly fell under the radar, but it's actually pretty good, and Gere is really good as a "fraud", who almost pulled off a huge scheme, fooling the world into believing he knew who Howard Hughes was. That's a movie I recommend more people checking out. I think Gere was just afraid of being typecasted, which admittedly I can understand, but the dude's personality on filmed just screamed "romantic lead", take him out of that equation, and the results vary a lot more. His best and or more successful film generally have him playing off an actress, whether it's Julia Roberts, Debra Winger, or heck even Jodie Foster (I like Sommersby a lot). After Breathless, Gere played a half-English-Latin doctor, a musician, and a historical king, and he wasn't really cut out for any of the roles (he was especially brutally miscast as the Latin doctor in Beyond The Limit). I think even Gere eventually realized this, as he eventually went back to the Romantic genre, and didn't seem to regret it at all, and aside from a few missteps, his career has been a lot better for it. It's curious though. I think he is at least as good an actor as someone like George Clooney, but hasn't had anywhere the same type of good fortune with awards bodies. I know Clooney is one of the premiere schmoozers in Hollywood and being considered good at other things (directing, producing etc) has helped his prestige factor, but in a world where Clooney has 4 acting Oscar nominations and a win, it's pretty sad that Gere has never even been nominated. Guess he got closest to a nomination for Chicago, when he won the Golden Globe for Best Actor In A Musical or Comedy. Must have been brutal for Gere to wake up on Oscar nomination morning to realise everybody from Chicago who could possibly have got a nomination, got it. Except for him. I still maintain the fact that he revels in his ladies man image more than any other movie star probably has not endeared him to old male Academy voters. His "I can get any girl I want,including your wife" vibe defintely rubs many men up the wrong way. Awards can be quite political about who they like and don't, as we discussed with Susan Sarandon.I can't think of a performance where he merited the win in a given year, but 2-4 nominations would not be unreasonsble for someone like Gere. I think even a nod for Pretty Woman would have been deserving, as I feel he make the whole thing work as well as Julia Roberts.
I'm absolutely with you on Sommersby as well. A real underrated gem of a movie. Jodie Foster rarely has strong romantic chemistry with male co-stars, so it's a testament to Gere's aptitude as a romantic lead that you feel the chemistry between him and Foster in this one. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 11, 2019 3:03:50 GMT
The Hoax is the sort of the film that unfairly fell under the radar, but it's actually pretty good, and Gere is really good as a "fraud", who almost pulled off a huge scheme, fooling the world into believing he knew who Howard Hughes was. That's a movie I recommend more people checking out. I think Gere was just afraid of being typecasted, which admittedly I can understand, but the dude's personality on filmed just screamed "romantic lead", take him out of that equation, and the results vary a lot more. His best and or more successful film generally have him playing off an actress, whether it's Julia Roberts, Debra Winger, or heck even Jodie Foster (I like Sommersby a lot). After Breathless, Gere played a half-English-Latin doctor, a musician, and a historical king, and he wasn't really cut out for any of the roles (he was especially brutally miscast as the Latin doctor in Beyond The Limit). I think even Gere eventually realized this, as he eventually went back to the Romantic genre, and didn't seem to regret it at all, and aside from a few missteps, his career has been a lot better for it. It's curious though. I think he is at least as good an actor as someone like George Clooney, but hasn't had anywhere the same type of good fortune with awards bodies. I know Clooney is one of the premiere schmoozers in Hollywood and being considered good at other things (directing, producing etc) has helped his prestige factor, but in a world where Clooney has 4 acting Oscar nominations and a win, it's pretty sad that Gere has never even been nominated. Guess he got closest to a nomination for Chicago, when he won the Golden Globe for Best Actor In A Musical or Comedy. Must have been brutal for Gere to wake up on Oscar nomination morning to realise everybody from Chicago who could possibly have got a nomination, got it. Except for him. I still maintain the fact that he revels in his ladies man image more than any other movie star probably has not endeared him to old male Academy voters. His "I can get any girl I want,including your wife" vibe defintely rubs many men up the wrong way. Awards can be quite political about who they like and don't, as we discussed with Susan Sarandon.I can't think of a performance where he merited the win in a given year, but 2-4 nominations would not be unreasonsble for someone like Gere. I think even a nod for Pretty Woman would have been deserving, as I feel he make the whole thing work as well as Julia Roberts.
I'm absolutely with you on Sommersby as well. A real underrated gem of a movie. Jodie Foster rarely has strong romantic chemistry with male co-stars, so it's a testament to Gere's aptitude as a romantic lead that you feel the chemistry between him and Foster in this one. I believe Gere has the record for most Golden Globes "Best Leading Actor nominations", without receiving a single Oscar nomination, though I'll have to re-research that. I know I remember reading that Gere was pretty bummed out about his lack of nomination for Chicago, especially given how he seemed to be doing so well with the other major awards show. Somehow I always assumed that the academy just didn't like him, although it's probably a lot more complicated then that. Clooney is just better at picking projects (well until recently anyway). Gere's been in some great movies, but his follow-ups to those films tend to movies you've probably never even heard of in comparison, since they usually go a lot less unnoticed, and or barely get released. I can't think of any films that Gere's done that merited a win, but I absolutely think he deserved some Oscar love for Arbitage. Since that was to me a great example of performance of a seasoned actor, getting past his limitations, and now going for broke with some absolutely solid work, resulting from it. Sommersby even surprised me more, given that it was a remake of a Werzner Herzog film (edit: actually a French film, got it mixed-up with another one of his films), one of his less talked about movies, mind you. Didn't think it was possible to remake a Herzog film, and have it be really good, but by god they did. , but by god they did. Gere and Foster have great chemistry together, and it also features one of Danny Elfman's best and most beautiful scores as well. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 11, 2019 8:43:04 GMT
Sommersby even surprised me more, given that it was a remake of a Werzner Herzog film, one of his less talked about movies, mind you. Didn't think it was possible to remake a Herzog film, and have it be really good, but by god they did. This is actually incorrect - The Return of Martin Guerre which was directed by Daniel Vigne - not a Herzog film - one of my favorite films of the 80s actually, I love the original movie. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 11, 2019 11:52:15 GMT
Gerard DepardieuGenre : Period Drama / Literary-Historical BiographyI've mentioned this thread is a bit labeled incorrectly - the actors mentioned early on were unquestionably great - Irons, Huppert, Daniel Day Lewis, Olivier etc. and they worked genre but often times here it is just "good" actors who were made famous by the genre - that's not "great" actors impacting genre after all. But Depardieu is unquestionably a great actor of the highest order and this type of film he almost solely defined as a one man French film industry. Danton, Colonel Chabert, Cyrano, Martin Guerre, Jean De Florette, Camille Claudel (as Rodan), 1492 (as Colombus), Germinal, Balzac, Les Miserables and many others What is amazing about Depardieu is more than any other actor I've ever seen he evokes Marlon Brando without ever specifically adopting any Brando traits or stylistic devices. That makes him somehow seem simultaneous modern and exciting yet suited to any period piece as well - the fact that the young punk from Going Places IS Cyrano gets into the same exact quality as Gary Oldman (as Sid Vicious AND Beethoven covered earlier). It's thrilling to watch how effortlessly he would slip into period skin and embody historical characters and even the fictional characters take on an eerie quality as if they were historical or literary. Rarely in film history has a country rallied around an actor and asked him to embody such a wide swath of cultural history specifically (though he didn't always play French even) and it's almost inconceivable an actor could actually do it. It's a kind of acting history what he did ...... Depardieu, from Danton ..........one of the very best from one of the very best:  |
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Aug 11, 2019 19:59:27 GMT
Gerard DepardieuGenre : Period Drama / Literary-Historical BiographyI've mentioned this thread is a bit labeled incorrectly - the actors mentioned early on were unquestionably great - Irons, Huppert, Daniel Day Lewis, Olivier etc. and they worked genre but often times here it is just "good" actors who were made famous by the genre - that's not "great" actors impacting genre after all. But Depardieu is unquestionably a great actor of the highest order and this type of film he almost solely defined as a one man French film industry. Danton, Colonel Chabert, Cyrano, Martin Guerre, Jean De Florette, Camille Claudel (as Rodan), 1492 (as Colombus), Germinal, Balzac, Les Miserables and many others What is amazing about Depardieu is more than any other actor I've ever seen he evokes Marlon Brando without ever specifically adopting any Brando traits or stylistic devices. That makes him somehow seem simultaneous modern and exciting yet suited to any period piece as well - the fact that the young punk from Going Places IS Cyrano gets into the same exact quality as Gary Oldman (as Sid Vicious AND Beethoven covered earlier). It's thrilling to watch how effortlessly he would slip into period skin and embody historical characters and even the fictional characters take on an eerie quality as if they were historical or literary. Rarely in film history has a country rallied around an actor and asked him to embody such a wide swath of cultural history specifically (though he didn't always play French even) and it's almost inconceivable an actor could actually do it. It's a kind of acting history what he did ...... Depardieu, from Danton ..........one of the very best from one of the very best: I've been on a Depardieu kick this summer, watching a bunch of his films that I hadn't seen yet. What would you say are his top 5 performances in general? |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 11, 2019 21:25:52 GMT
I've been on a Depardieu kick this summer, watching a bunch of his films that I hadn't seen yet. What would you say are his top 5 performances in general? Well, he's tricky because the big ones are so overwhelming you kind of have to list them first and his 80s-early 90s were so amazing they all come from that period - Return of Martin Guerre, Danton, Cyrano, The Woman Next Door and I guess Under the Sun of Satan but the last one is arguable for me he because has so many contenders in that time period you start to be in awe of everything he did (Loulou, Choice of Arms, Police, the great Jean De Florette and riotous comedies like Buffet Froid and the perceptive Too Beautiful for you - it was quite a run in those days). I will say that he has an early performance I always recommend and it's the kind that actors never get - not just a breakthrough but a warm-up in Claude Miller's This Sweet Sickness . Most people haven't seen that one but if you can find it it's like a template for many of the things he'd refine specifically in his acting style in the 80s and Miller asked him to play a somewhat preposterous part too - nerdy, but dangerous, in love with love, having grandiose thoughts not rooted in reality (or the page), wild psychological swings in behavior.......and he played it like it was his try out for Hamlet.........which it sort of was in a way. That particular film - flawed but occasionally great and on to something complicated in his acting gave him an opportunity to try out a lot of things without fearing if they would fail and later when he worked on tighter scripts with better directors ........he hit the jackpot. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 11, 2019 22:04:28 GMT
Gary Oldman
Genre: Crime
A great actor, Oldman's contribution to the Crime genre feels a bit underrated. For me arguably his best film performance (top 3 at least) came in a crime/gangster movie about Irish-American mobsters, State Of Grace. In a dynamic and incendiary performance as loose cannon Jackie Flannery, Oidman gave a masterclass in how to obliterate everybody else on screen, including seasoned pros like Ed Harris and would-be generational rivals like Sean Penn. It was brutal, but that cast ( also including Robin Wright and John C Reilly) were basically helpless spectators to the Gary Oldman show. State Of Grace kinda bombed at the box office (It had the misfortune to come out the same year as Goodfellas , which soaked up most of the gangster movie love) but Oidman's perform ance has helped give it a sort of lasting cult classic status.
Another great crime film Oldman was involved in was Leon (also known as The Professional). Oldman played a supporting role to the main story about a contract killer taking a little girl under his wing. As a seemingly permanently coked-up corrupt cop, Oldman gave the sort of larger than life lunatic performance that began to define him in antagonist/villain roles in the 90''s. He also gave a very memorable turn as a white Rastafarian in True Romance.
Arguably his biggest and most lasting impression in the Crime genre is Chris Nolan' s The Dark Knight trilogy. Obviously these can be primarily seen as Superhero/Action movies, but Nolan's conceit was to treat Batman as if he might exist in the real world, and essentially make a series of mostly grounded crime movies with a guy dressed as a Bat at it's centre. In a wonderfully restrained and humane performance as good cop Jim Gordon , Oldman is arguably the heart and soul of the trilogy. Below, Oldman acting Sean Penn off the screen in State Of Grace:
|
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 12, 2019 0:52:36 GMT
Gary OldmanGenre: CrimeA great actor, Oldman's contribution to the Crime genre feels a bit underrated. For me arguably his best film performance (top 3 at least) came in a crime/gangster movie about Irish-American mobsters, State Of Grace. In a dynamic and incendiary performance as loose cannon Jackie Flannery, Oidman gave a masterclass in how to obliterate everybody else on screen, including seasoned pros like Ed Harris and would-be generational rivals like Sean Penn. It was brutal, but that cast ( also including Robin Wright and John C Reilly) were basically helpless spectators to the Gary Oldman show. State Of Grace kinda bombed at the box office (It had the misfortune to come out the same year as Goodfellas , which soaked up most of the gangster movie love) but Oidman's perform ance has helped give it a sort of lasting cult classic status. Another great crime film Oldman was involved in was Leon (also known as The Professional). Oldman played a supporting role to the main story about a contract killer taking a little girl under his wing. As a seemingly permanently coked-up corrupt cop, Oldman gave the sort of larger than life lunatic performance that began to define him in antagonist/villain roles in the 90''s. He also gave a very memorable turn as a white Rastafarian in True Romance.Arguably his biggest and most lasting impression in the Crime genre is Chris Nolan' s The Dark Knight trilogy. Obviously these can be primarily seen as Superhero/Action movies, but Nolan's conceit was to treat Batman as if he might exist in the real world, and essentially make a series of mostly grounded crime movies with a guy dressed as a Bat at it's centre. In a wonderfully restrained and humane performance as good cop Jim Gordon , Oldman is arguably the heart and soul of the trilogy. Below, Oldman acting Sean Penn off the screen in State Of Grace:
While not a crime film necessarily, his role in JFK as Harvey Lee Oswald was definitely in the same sort of mold, a suspected craze. Honestly, I'm still surprised he never got any awards attention for that film, but apparently only TLJ stood-out to most. Oldman has done a lot of crap, most of it he has admitted has been for money, but he generally seems to shine most when it comes to playing villains and or extremely antagonist characters, hence why crime flicks would be perfect for him to do. It's also what makes his turn as Jim Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy all the more startling. He's actually a great ally and counterpoint to Batman throughout all three films. Sometimes I don't think he gets enough love or attention for his portrayal. One Oldman "crime flick", you didn't mention, that I want to bring-up was Romeo Is Bleeding. While not a great film (it's cool, but often I find it to be unsure of itself), Oldman definitely chews up the scenery, and provides a stylish film with the much needed energy it deserves. It's a serious great piece of work. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 12, 2019 1:24:34 GMT
Gary OldmanGenre: CrimeA great actor, Oldman's contribution to the Crime genre feels a bit underrated. For me arguably his best film performance (top 3 at least) came in a crime/gangster movie about Irish-American mobsters, State Of Grace. In a dynamic and incendiary performance as loose cannon Jackie Flannery, Oidman gave a masterclass in how to obliterate everybody else on screen, including seasoned pros like Ed Harris and would-be generational rivals like Sean Penn. It was brutal, but that cast ( also including Robin Wright and John C Reilly) were basically helpless spectators to the Gary Oldman show. State Of Grace kinda bombed at the box office (It had the misfortune to come out the same year as Goodfellas , which soaked up most of the gangster movie love) but Oidman's perform ance has helped give it a sort of lasting cult classic status. Another great crime film Oldman was involved in was Leon (also known as The Professional). Oldman played a supporting role to the main story about a contract killer taking a little girl under his wing. As a seemingly permanently coked-up corrupt cop, Oldman gave the sort of larger than life lunatic performance that began to define him in antagonist/villain roles in the 90''s. He also gave a very memorable turn as a white Rastafarian in True Romance.Arguably his biggest and most lasting impression in the Crime genre is Chris Nolan' s The Dark Knight trilogy. Obviously these can be primarily seen as Superhero/Action movies, but Nolan's conceit was to treat Batman as if he might exist in the real world, and essentially make a series of mostly grounded crime movies with a guy dressed as a Bat at it's centre. In a wonderfully restrained and humane performance as good cop Jim Gordon , Oldman is arguably the heart and soul of the trilogy. Below, Oldman acting Sean Penn off the screen in State Of Grace:
While not a crime film necessarily, his role in JFK as Harvey Lee Oswald was definitely in the same sort of mold, a suspected craze. Honestly, I'm still surprised he never got any awards attention for that film, but apparently only TLJ stood-out to most. Oldman has done a lot of crap, most of it he has admitted has been for money, but he generally seems to shine most when it comes to playing villains and or extremely antagonist characters, hence why crime flicks would be perfect for him to do. It's also what makes his turn as Jim Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy all the more startling. He's actually a great ally and counterpoint to Batman throughout all three films. Sometimes I don't think he gets enough love or attention for his portrayal. One Oldman "crime flick", you didn't mention, that I want to bring-up was Romeo Is Bleeding. While not a great film (it's cool, but often I find it to be unsure of itself), Oldman definitely chews up the scenery, and provides a stylish film with the much needed energy it deserves. It's a serious great piece of work. I love, LOVE what Oldman did as Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy. The work, taken over the context of 3 movies worth of character development is beautiful. I think it also redefined people's beliefs of what Oldman was capable of. To many, he seemed like the ultimate scenery chewer. Gordon's restraint seemed to go against everything we thought we knew about Oldman as a performer, and I think it really helped even people in the industry see him in a different light. Not sure he would have gotten a role as buttoned down as Smiley in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy if he didn't do Gordon so exceptionally. I don't regard JFK as a crime film (political thriller/drama?) even though there is clearly a lot of criminal activity in it  , but I suspect he didn't get awards attention because he was new to Hollywood. There were a lot of supporting performance that could be pushed for awards in that film (even the perenially ignored Donald Sutherland), but maybe Oldman's status as a Hollywood newbie went against him, despite giving arguably the film's most impressive performance. I recall enjoying Romeo Is Bleeding when I was in a Gary Oldman completionist phase years ago (before I realised how many truly awful films he made would make being an Oldman completionist near impossible for me). Probably need to see it again to rate it fairly though. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Aug 12, 2019 1:47:23 GMT
While not a crime film necessarily, his role in JFK as Harvey Lee Oswald was definitely in the same sort of mold, a suspected craze. Honestly, I'm still surprised he never got any awards attention for that film, but apparently only TLJ stood-out to most. Oldman has done a lot of crap, most of it he has admitted has been for money, but he generally seems to shine most when it comes to playing villains and or extremely antagonist characters, hence why crime flicks would be perfect for him to do. It's also what makes his turn as Jim Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy all the more startling. He's actually a great ally and counterpoint to Batman throughout all three films. Sometimes I don't think he gets enough love or attention for his portrayal. One Oldman "crime flick", you didn't mention, that I want to bring-up was Romeo Is Bleeding. While not a great film (it's cool, but often I find it to be unsure of itself), Oldman definitely chews up the scenery, and provides a stylish film with the much needed energy it deserves. It's a serious great piece of work. I love, LOVE what Oldman did as Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy. The work, taken over the context of 3 movies worth of character development is beautiful. I think it also redefined people's beliefs of what Oldman was capable of. To many, he seemed like the ultimate scenery chewer. Gordon's restraint seemed to go against everything we thought we knew about Oldman as a performer, and I think it really helped even people in the industry see him in a different light. Not sure he would have gotten a role as buttoned down as Smiley in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy if he didn't do Gordon so exceptionally. I don't regard JFK as a crime film (political thriller/drama?) even though there is clearly a lot of criminal activity in it , but I suspect he didn't get awards attention because he was new to Hollywood. There were a lot of supporting performance that could be pushed for awards in that film (even the perenially ignored Donald Sutherland), but maybe Oldman's status as a Hollywood newbie went against him, despite giving arguably the film's most impressive performance. I recall enjoying Romeo Is Bleeding when I was in a Gary Oldman completionist phase years ago (before I realised how many truly awful films he made would make being an Oldman completionist near impossible for me). Probably need to see it again to rate it fairly though. 's role as Gordon definitely showed a softer side to his personality in film, that we hadn't seen much prior to that. He's really a noble spirit out to help Batman, amiright? I just love the arc his character goes through in those films too. It's so good. I don't regard JFK as a crime film either. I more wanted to highlight his performance, because it reminds me of so many of those crime films you highlighted, especially with how the film itself presents Oswald. I think Oldman has admitted he's a "take the money, and run" type of guy, which is why you see him in so many movies that almost literally have gone straight to DVD in the past, that and his Hollywood roles haven't always been the best, but I do recommend rewatching Romeo is Bleeding, if only for his work in the film itself. It's very mightily impressive. It probably makes up for the film's very many shortcomings, for me. |
|
, but I suspect he didn't get awards attention because he was new to Hollywood. There were a lot of supporting performance that could be pushed for awards in that film (even the perenially ignored Donald Sutherland), but maybe Oldman's status as a Hollywood newbie went against him, despite giving arguably the film's most impressive performance.