|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 17, 2020 18:56:42 GMT
See, I love Jeff Bridges but he doesn't have the awards hardware in the larger sense - where he stands in overall acting metrics is comparable (ahead maybe overall imo) to Denzel but it's far below DePac and Hanks (or Nicholson who actually is in the US GOAT conversation legitimately). I do think Bridges is underrated but ranking him within the top 15 (with all these guys) seems far more reasonable to say than ranking him in the all-time US top 10 or higher than that (?).......I think he has maybe some career arguments against Washington specifically and maybe some others against Hanks too.........and heck I may even like him the most of these 4 myself ..............but he's in this comparative class it seems to me. If he's underrated he just ranks ahead of these guys more than he starts jumping the usual suspects/gallery of greats .........anyway I think the TV show is a big deal too especially if he does it multiple seasons - it's a unique skill set for him to pull that off if he does.......
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jun 17, 2020 19:10:21 GMT
Denzel Washington, to me he's the ultimate actor actors out of the bunch. He's conquered theaters, he's done thrillers, he's been big, he's been small, he's played villains and historical figures amazingly, all while still being charming and constantly entertaining to watch. His performances in Malcolm X and Fences are some of the greatest examples of superb character acting that I can think of.
Hanks is close by, but sometimes I do wish he would get out of his comfort zone more, though I understand the hesitation. He's given some incredible performances though, Cast Away, Forrest Gump, even his recent work in Bridge of Spies was extremely unsung. He's also one of those actors that much like Denzel is constantly entertaining in whatever he is, even when he's frequently playing a guy who's good at his job.
Jeff Bridges is great too, and I've started to appreciate his acting more, especially as he's gotten older, and more grizzled. Although sometimes I wish he would stop it these days with the mumbling, he has a back catalog of unsung or underseen performances that deserve more appreciation. Starman, Fearless, The Contender, The Fisher King, American Heart etc... Some of those roles are just downright brave and brilliant.
DiCaprio has come into his own in the last decade. Earlier on I was on the train that he was often miscast in some roles like Gangs of New York and The Aviator (He was good in it, but his babyface demeanor kept getting in the way), but now with The Wolf of Wall Street and especially Once Upon Time in Hollywood, I think he's graduated into one of the best actors of his generation.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jun 17, 2020 19:42:09 GMT
Bridges of course is potentially the only GOAT of all time contender (and like I said I don't consider him "that" close to that real title - none of these guys are imo - but he's top 15ish like all these guys are so that's pretty major) to triumph in a TV series after triumphing in film........his TV series due later this year with John Lithgow. It is an exciting proposition - not a miniseries or TV movie but a weekly series - potentially his own Tony Soprano or Walter White or Frank Underwood. If he pulls that off - which would be a VERY Jeff Bridges thing to do it will be pretty cool - that's going into rare movie star/series star territory which only Glenn Close has really pulled off for a top level actor (this is arguable for Spacey, Hoffman, Pacino but Spacey I don't consider a "GOAT" contender and the other 2 were more minor shows or in Hoffman's case got an early cancellation unfortunately) OKKK Now I'm really pumped up for The Old Man. You also bring up a fascinating discussion - when the Greats do tv series, who's done it the best? or has at least a legit great series? Penn recently failed, PSH didn't get to finish his, are Bosom Buddies or St Elsewhere (from two of our guys in this poll) noteworthy in any way? I always forget that they did those. Hopkins is pretty good with some great moments in Westworld, but I don't think that show is so great (I dropped out mid S2). Hoffman/Luck is up there but it's a flawed show. To take it back, How about George C Scott- East Side/West Side which is never discussed but an important show (I've only seen bits). Also, most don't consider these actors GOATs - but s/o to Columbo and Johnny Staccato!!!
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 17, 2020 19:42:29 GMT
Give me the Hollywood A-List superstar leading man who can do Malcolm X, Alonzo Harris, and King Lear. He hasn't played King Lear - not yet....................it reminds me of Denis Potvin who famously asked the press about his Canada Cup Teammate Bobby Orr - "is he going to ACTUALLY have to do it or are you going to keep calling him the best regardless?" Now having said that I would like to see his King Lear too - I've actually seen him onstage more than anyone here I think (?) - ........ you could have said Malcolm X, Alonzo Harris, and Macbeth and then it would have been factually correct...........
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 17, 2020 19:52:23 GMT
OKKK Now I'm really pumped up for The Old Man. You also bring up a fascinating discussion - when the Greats do tv series, who's done it the best? or has at least a legit great series? Penn recently failed, PSH didn't get to finish his, are Bosom Buddies or St Elsewhere (from two of our guys in this poll) noteworthy in any way? I always forget that they did those. Hopkins is pretty good with some great moments in Westworld, but I don't think that show is so great (I dropped out mid S2). Hoffman/Luck is up there but it's a flawed show. To take it back, How about George C Scott- East Side/West Side which is never discussed but an important show (I've only seen bits). Also, most don't consider these actors GOATs - but s/o to Columbo and Johnny Staccato!!! Hanks is more memorable as the drunk uncle (druncle!) on Family Ties actually and St. Elsewhere is a great show and Denzel is fine in it .......(the actual best acting of that era on mainstream TV is in Hill Street Blues, dammit!). I think there's a big difference between starting on TV (Bruce Willis, George Clooney) and what Bridges is trying a - a 7 time Oscar nominee going to TV, working in a whole new way and routine forcing themselves to be among a cast. Bryan Cranston is to me a real good example and he's not an A-lister in movies but he's got an Oscar, nod, 2 Tonys in 5 years - for more or less original roles (not "classics"), a GOAT level landmark series role and others where he's a riot so a totally different material spin (Seinfeld, Malcolm in the Middle) He's kind of amazing in this way........ Side note : East Side/West Side was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ahead of its time.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 17, 2020 19:53:20 GMT
By the way, all you Denzel lovers, St Elsewhere is on IMDBTV.
|
|
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: 4,850
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jun 17, 2020 20:04:28 GMT
Give me the Hollywood A-List superstar leading man who can do Malcolm X, Alonzo Harris, and King Lear. He hasn't played King Lear - not yet....................it reminds me of Denis Potvin who famously asked the press about his Canada Cup Teammate Bobby Orr - "is he going to ACTUALLY have to do it or are you going to keep calling him the best regardless?" Now having said that I would like to see his King Lear too - I've actually seen him onstage more than anyone here I think (?) - ........ you could have said Malcolm X, Alonzo Harris, and Macbeth and then it would have been factually correct........... Touche' Although if he pulls off King Lear, it would be a nice feather in the cap for the 15th greatest American actor ever. Wouldn't you say?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 17, 2020 20:24:48 GMT
He hasn't played King Lear - not yet....................it reminds me of Denis Potvin who famously asked the press about his Canada Cup Teammate Bobby Orr - "is he going to ACTUALLY have to do it or are you going to keep calling him the best regardless?" Now having said that I would like to see his King Lear too - I've actually seen him onstage more than anyone here I think (?) - ........ you could have said Malcolm X, Alonzo Harris, and Macbeth and then it would have been factually correct........... Touche' Although if he pulls off King Lear, it would be a nice feather in the cap for the 15th greatest American actor ever. Wouldn't you say?Oh I would say more than that: * First one correction: I never called him the 15th great American actor ever - that's maybe too much praise I said he was within the top ~15 US all time so not including Oldman, DDL etc. .......I said he was within the ~top 15 - so he could be 11th.......he could be 13th...........he may be just outside the top 15.........that's what ~ means etc. I know for sure that I did a top 10 US list ......and he didn't make it that high. * I would say if he gets a nomination for Macbeth it could put him in my personal US top 10 - that's a big deal - no American male has been nodded in 70 years - it's a huge deal................. and would be more impressive to me than a successful Lear (or a 3rd Oscar or 2nd Tony which wouldn't mean much to me actually). * Lear would be nice but I also wouldn't hold a Lear that fails (especially on stage) against him either. I could make a case for Anthony Hopkins as the worlds best living actor period........I thought his Lear was fine........but I've seen a lot better portrayals of Lear ......but I think he's taking his Lear and putting it into The Father so it becomes something else - something potentially great. I try to see stage acting in that larger sense for movie stars......... ...........and let me say it's nice to get a real question about him and not something sarcastic like I have to deal with. I've seen Denzel Washington more than anyone on stage and every thing on film so he's a guy I know real well......... Thank you for asking!
|
|
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: 4,850
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jun 17, 2020 20:34:59 GMT
Touche' Although if he pulls off King Lear, it would be a nice feather in the cap for the 15th greatest American actor ever. Wouldn't you say?Oh I would say more than that: * First one correction: I never called him the 15th best actor - that's too much praise I said he was within the top ~15 US all time so not including Oldman, DDL etc. .......I said he was within the ~top 15 - so he could be 11th.......he could be 13th...........he may be just outside the top 15.........that's what ~ means etc. I know for sure that I did a top 10 US list ......and he didn't make it that high. * I would say if he gets a nomination for Macbeth it could put him in my personal US top 10 - that's a big deal - no American male has been nodded in 70 years - it's a huge deal................. and would be more impressive to me than a successful Lear (or a 3rd Oscar or 2nd Tony which wouldn't mean much to me actually). * Lear would be nice but I also wouldn't hold a Lear that fails (especially on stage) against him either. I could make a case for Anthony Hopkins as the worlds best living actor period........I thought his Lear was fine........but I've seen a lot better portrayals of Lear ......but I think he's taking his Lear and putting it into The Father so it becomes something else - something potentially great. I try to see stage acting in that larger sense for movie stars......... ...........and let me say it's nice to get a real question about him and not something sarcastic like I have to deal with. I've seen Denzel Washington more than anyone on stage and every thing on film so he's a guy I know real well......... Thank you for asking! No problem. I'll say this about you Pacinoyes, if there's anything Denzel related (news, rumors, new movie trailer, general discussion) talked about on this board, I can count on you to be there one way or the other. Matter of fact if I don't see you in a Denzel thread I would be shocked...shocked I tell you. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jun 17, 2020 21:13:52 GMT
yeah, Washington for me. He has the best performance between all of 'em ( Malcolm X). Hanks is a lovely guy and I enjoy seeing him in stuff, but I wouldn't rank any of his stuff (except probably Captain Phillips) as all-time. Bridges is really wonderful too and on a different day I might vote for him instead. One of my most-nominated actors to not get any wins, and spread across several decades (and still going strong!). The only difference for me is you can tell when Bridges isn't really trying ( Morning After, Fabulous Baker Boys) whereas Washington is always watchable/entertaining no matter what he's doing. Also going with Washington because I was just thinking the other day how truly wonderful he was in Roman J. Israel, Esq. (dumb fucking title) which is destined to be underrated forever because it's trapped in a forgettable POS film with a dumb fucking title. DiCaprio doesn't belong in this list.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 17, 2020 21:21:34 GMT
Also going with Washington because I was just thinking the other day how truly wonderful he was in Roman J. Israel, Esq. (dumb fucking title) which is destined to be underrated forever because it's trapped in a forgettable POS film with a dumb fucking title. The reception of the film itself really fucked him, because I really think his performance in Roman J Israel , Esq merited the Best Actor win (which should have been back to back wins with Fences). He gave the best performance in that category, imho (I'd have Day-Lewis in Phantom Thread as runner-up and Oldman in Darkest Hour in third). But yeah, it'll be underrated because the film itself wasn't that well recieved. I like the film more than you do, but agree that Washington was wonderful in it.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 17, 2020 21:24:30 GMT
No problem. I'll say this about you Pacinoyes, if there's anything Denzel related (news, rumors, new movie trailer, general discussion) talked about on this board, I can count on you to be there one way or the other. Oh you have no idea the role he plays in my real life.............. I posted this in bold on May 5 2018 in the Theater thread (0 likes, no one replied, everyone was too busy discussing their profound stage acting theories I guess )..........anyway he's become a patron of the school's theater arts department now since this (not kidding) which has made him an absolute hero to her ......... when we see my GF's friend she always brings this sh*t up............. to the point that I either need a new GF ...............or my GF needs a new friend.........or she needs to join this board. My girlfriend's friend by the way worked on the sound (as one of the college kids that help the production) and was telling us that Washington came out and talked to all of them about their careers and the light people and stage design etc. - which is apparently quite rare - she works on a lot of plays and it sometimes happens but not much and that he was very nice and gracious to them all and talked for a good bit.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jun 18, 2020 1:12:30 GMT
*shakes fist*
1. DiCaprio - I must intercede on his behalf. He's the biggest star of the foursome while also being the most technically gifted, and the most emotionally expressive and explosive (Denzel is close though).
2. Denzel - Unshakable and the most consistently strong actor of recent times besides PSH and Bardem. Has been mind-blowingly great in wildly different modes (The Hurricane/Training Day says it all).
Bridges and Hanks are comparable, but neither belong in a GOAT discussion (a youngin' like Gosling in his short time has displayed more acting muscle and creativity than either of them IMO). Hanks deserves credit for taking on the leading man challenge, and Bridges is much more comfortable and adept at depicting varying shades of moral character (i.e. where Hanks has been a failure).
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jun 18, 2020 18:54:52 GMT
Been chewing on this, love all and feel like I have reasons to pick any of them, which makes this a great poll. Denzel has highest peak perfs (Fences, X) but goes slim a little after those, whereas Hanks seems to have spanned more qualities across his work - romantic, comedic, even in physicality, over Denzel. Bridges has the most amount of noteworthy perfs - and can curve at you unexpectedly, like at the end of last year when I watched El Royale and American Heart I was surprised by the depth and edge in those perfs. He kinda lacks some real knockouts, to me he has a long block of perfs that are all even-tiered greatness... he's mastered his own kind of shuffling charm too. These are some of the most immediately likable, watchable actors ever.....
And then there's Leo, who I didn't always love but the man keeps proving me wrong. I thought he was brilliant and hilarious in OUATIH - still confused why more praise kicked over to Pitt?? Even his 90s work impresses in how he dares, or disappears, or even satirizes himself. Yeah I think I'm picking Leo, for today - maybe bc he's already neck-and-neck with these guys which sort of proves what talent! or maybe bc he has the least votes and I dig the under-bidded, but really I like the long odds.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 18, 2020 19:29:23 GMT
And then there's Leo, who I didn't always love but the man keeps proving me wrong. I thought he was brilliant and hilarious in OUATIH - still confused why more praise kicked over to Pitt?? Even his 90s work impresses in how he dares, or disappears, or even satirizes himself. Yeah I think I'm picking Leo, for today - maybe bc he's already neck-and-neck with these guys which sort of proves what talent! or maybe bc he has the least votes and I dig the under-bidded, but really I like the long odds. I always say if you compare 2 actors head to head it sometimes plays different then if you compare them across more actors - DiCaprio I'm guessing will lose this poll because he's far back - although obviously this will end in a statistical dead heat more or less but .........I'm not sure why he's lagging. His pace of Oscar nods is behind no male ever (?) tied with Nicholson /Burton iirc - 6 at 45 years of age, his SAG history exceeds them all right now (and everyone else ever?)....... his Golden Globe nods exceed Bridges, Washington and Hanks already - his GG wins exceed 2 of the 3 (1 behind Hanks), so do his BAFTA stats (tied with Hanks - 5 nods and 1 more win - Hanks has never won BAFTA) his amount of BP nods and distinguished directors is kind of amazing and obliterates Bridges/Washington, he been a star for 25 years, he's got comic triumphs, and he's got a high peaks, he has more types of work too - ensembles/leads etc. A lot of people were like "I didn't really like him until the 2010s" which I understand - I was the same way .......but maybe it's time we all just admit we were a little wrong prior to the 2010s too.....
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 18, 2020 19:37:44 GMT
A lot of people were like "I didn't really like him until the 2010s" which I understand - I was the same way ....... but maybe it's time we all just admit we were a little wrong prior to the 2010s too..... It's refreshing to see you admit to that. I remember when DiCaprio was your original Bradley Cooper
|
|
|
Post by HELENA MARIA on Jun 18, 2020 21:05:59 GMT
Ranking
Denzel Tom Jeff Leo
|
|
|
Post by mattfincher on Jun 18, 2020 21:15:49 GMT
Talent: Denzel Jeff Leo Tom
Quality of nominations: Denzel Leo Tom Jeff (I think he's largely been nominated for the wrong roles)
Filmography: Tom Leo Jeff Denzel
|
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,533
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by Javi on Jun 18, 2020 21:43:03 GMT
Bridges! "Quintessentially American" sounds about right but he's also weird and specific and a great presence. Washington's a major talent obviously. DiCaprio finally won me over last year... he's my win for Once Upon a Time. Hanks is clearly a cultural icon and a fountain of human goodness but he also makes me uncomfortable for the same reasons Love him in Cast Away, though!
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jun 18, 2020 22:06:03 GMT
I'll talk about each of them.
Denzel Washington - He is somewhat of a platonic ideal of an acting star. Extremely versatile, technically perfect and transferable to different mediums (dude could do an audiobook and it'd be moving), can elevate weak material through sheer creative force of will or supersede the challenge of a great script, and has legitimate megawatt charisma on top of that all. He is in so total command of his craft that I at least go in with full confidence he will never fall flat on his face on screen. If I had to nitpick a weakness (and it really is nitpicking with someone that perfect), it's that he too often lends himself to roles that ask him to play empty stoicism. Since he is an innately cool actor to watch and can play stoicism as easily as one puts on pants, he's never embarrassingly off-the-mark or anything, but it does mean that performances like The Book of Eli that populate his résumé more than they should leave absolutely no impression. But again, that's just nitpicking that the guy who did Malcolm X, Training Day, and The Devil in a Blue Dress isn't doing that all the time. In other words, the only issue anyone can have with Denzel is their own greed he sometimes has base hits instead of grand slams.
Tom Hanks - The unique thing about him to me is that he made it so far up the acting echelons despite his toolset not fitting the post-Brando mold for great acting the way his peer Denzel does. Hanks is not innately cool or intimidating, he's not going to light up the screen with intensity, he won't win you over by walking into frame out of sheer charisma, and people generally don't leave the theatre idolizing or wishing to be his characters. He's a naturally gifted comedy actor who grew into drama and his direct relationship with the audience is one rooted in how comforting his presence is to the point where he was the only choice in Hollywood to play Mr. Rogers. What I do find his strengths as an actor: impeccable handling of tone, his generosity as an actor leaving his co-stars plenty to work off, and the ease with which he performs. Those aren't "see"-able in the same way most other great acting is and probably goes to show why his most "see"-able performances (Forrest Gump, Cast Away) are often lauded as his best. It's far easier to aspire to be the actor delivering the great monologue or to externalize just how much trouble the character is going through than to want to play off a romantic co-lead or be the decent guy. Everybody wants to hit the grand slam, most don't want to pitch. But Hanks just might be the greatest pitcher to ever live (I'm going to sorely regret using baseball analogies).
My time is running low so I'll get to Bridges and DiCaprio in a future post.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jun 18, 2020 23:10:32 GMT
Tom Hanks - The unique thing about him to me is that he made it so far up the acting echelons despite his toolset not fitting the post-Brando mold for great acting the way his peer Denzel does. Hanks is not innately cool or intimidating, he's not going to light up the screen with intensity, he won't win you over by walking into frame out of sheer charisma, and people generally don't leave the theatre idolizing or wishing to be his characters. He's a naturally gifted comedy actor who grew into drama and his direct relationship with the audience is one rooted in how comforting his presence is to the point where he was the only choice in Hollywood to play Mr. Rogers. What I do find his strengths as an actor: impeccable handling of tone, his generosity as an actor leaving his co-stars plenty to work off, and the ease with which he performs. Those aren't "see"-able in the same way most other great acting is and probably goes to show why his most "see"-able performances ( Forrest Gump, Cast Away) are often lauded as his best. It's far easier to aspire to be the actor delivering the great monologue or to externalize just how much trouble the character is going through than to want to play off a romantic co-lead or be the decent guy. Everybody wants to hit the grand slam, most don't want to pitch. But Hanks just might be the greatest pitcher to ever live (I'm going to sorely regret using baseball analogies). This blurb is a home-run! Ha ...ha.... I agree with you about tone - and I'm gonna use undervalued perfs as examples - like in The Ladykillers he's just as instructing tone as the Coens (maybe more!) even lifting the movie with his hilarity, highfalutin sniveling, pathetic stress. I just dig that loony perf and how he goes for it. And I agree with you about ease too - he single handedly makes You've Got Mail charming. You could watch that movie and think "eh, surface" but I'm quite moved by him in that perf, he makes the character so relatable (quoting The Godfather helps!), and like that simple shrug in the park at the end, it seems effortless in a perfect kinda way. Also his Rogers, who would think he'd be such a mysteriously wise fit there. That's a great perf. And he's generous - someone can double check , but I think a lot more actors have been nominated around Hanx than Denz. He tees up 'em up with the best (OK last one!) Look forward to your Leo/Bridges breakdown!!!
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jun 19, 2020 0:19:10 GMT
My problem with Hanks is that I never watch a Hanks performance and feel like I'm seeing a distillation of acting to its purest form. He's always good and game (and smoked Rylance's ridiculously minor performance in Bridge of Spies IMO; was very underrated in The Terminal both technically and otherwise, etc.), but there's a dash of the editorializing Will Smith instinct in him. He can't just embrace the human condition fully in what he's willing to channel.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 19, 2020 1:11:35 GMT
Tom Hanks - The unique thing about him to me is that he made it so far up the acting echelons despite his toolset not fitting the post-Brando mold for great acting the way his peer Denzel does. Hanks is not innately cool or intimidating, he's not going to light up the screen with intensity, he won't win you over by walking into frame out of sheer charisma, and people generally don't leave the theatre idolizing or wishing to be his characters. He's a naturally gifted comedy actor who grew into drama and his direct relationship with the audience is one rooted in how comforting his presence is to the point where he was the only choice in Hollywood to play Mr. Rogers. What I do find his strengths as an actor: impeccable handling of tone, his generosity as an actor leaving his co-stars plenty to work off, and the ease with which he performs. Those aren't "see"-able in the same way most other great acting is and probably goes to show why his most "see"-able performances ( Forrest Gump, Cast Away) are often lauded as his best. It's far easier to aspire to be the actor delivering the great monologue or to externalize just how much trouble the character is going through than to want to play off a romantic co-lead or be the decent guy. Everybody wants to hit the grand slam, most don't want to pitch. But Hanks just might be the greatest pitcher to ever live (I'm going to sorely regret using baseball analogies). - someone can double check , but I think a lot more actors have been nominated around Hanx than Denz. He tees up 'em up with the best (OK last one!) Well, of course more actors have been nomimated opposite Hanks than Washington. It's little to do with their respective "generosity" as actors (they are both genreous co-stars, but I'd argue that Washington actively makes his co-stars better, whereas Hanks is more passive on that front) and everything to do with the amount of Best Picture nominated films they've been in respectively. Hanks has been in a lot more than Washington. If the film's themselves are more baity, it stands to reason there are more baity parts for the Academy to pay attention to. Meryl Streep getting nominated for The Post has nothing to do with Hanks being a generous co-star or not. It's a baity BP nominee, with more than one role on the Academy's radar. Washington often has to will himself to a nomimation, as he's in far less BP nomimated films (unfairly, as some of his films probably merited BP nods, but that's beside the point). But very few actors have ever committed an act of generosity so great to their co-star, by letting them coattail their way to an Oscar nomination, in a film that wouldn't have gotten near the Oscars, without his performance. I'm talking what he did for Ethan Hawke in Training Day. He made Hawke better, and brought him along for the ride (and an Oscar nod of his own). Even though, Washington played the domineering character, he didn't run roughshod over Hawke like Daniel Day-Lewis did Leonardo DiCaprio in Gangs Of New York or Paul Dano in There Will Be Blood. Washington treated Hawke as a duet partner and it showed. Even though it didn't end up in any Oscar nominations, Washington displayed a similar level of generosity to Don Cheadle in Devil In A Blue Dress, in letting Cheadle shine in his supporting role without trying to make his character Easy a scene stealing attention seeker, like Cheadle's character Mouse. Again, it played like a duet.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 19, 2020 1:29:21 GMT
My problem with Hanks is that I never watch a Hanks performance and feel like I'm seeing a distillation of acting to its purest form. He's always good and game (and smoked Rylance's ridiculously minor performance in Bridge of Spies IMO; was very underrated in The Terminal both technically and otherwise, etc.), but there's a dash of the editorializing Will Smith instinct in him. He can't just embrace the human condition fully in what he's willing to channel. I'd agree that Hanks has something of Will Smith about him. Both very talented guys, but you can sense an ingratiating need to be liked by both that can almost be lethal to showing the full complexities of the human condition in dramatic terms.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 19, 2020 1:50:23 GMT
- someone can double check , but I think a lot more actors have been nominated around Hanx than Denz. He tees up 'em up with the best (OK last one!) Washington often has to will himself to a nomimation, as he's in less BP nomimated films (unfairly, as some of his films probably merited BP nods, but that's beside the point). But very few actors have ever committed an act of generosity so great to their co-star, by letting them coattail their way to an Oscar nomination, in a film that wouldn't have gotten near the Oscars, without his performance. I'm talking what he did for Ethan Hawke in Training Day. He made Hawke better, and brought him along for the ride (and an Oscar nod of his own). Even though, Washington played the domineering character, he didn't run roughshod over Hawke like Daniel Day-Lewis did Leonardo DiCaprio in Gangs Of New York. This is true and a myth - Washington being in films that weren't close to being BP contenders is a drawback and him being "better than his films" is a plus - he gets a lot of glitter for himself by being in lesser films but no one can say he has a filmography or co-stars opposite any of these 3 guys in the poll. I mean how is Abdi not an equivalent (or more) of Hawke for example for Hanks - and sure it's in a better movie (or a BP nodded film) but you can't hold that fact AGAINST Hanks simultaneously...... I mean no one is saying DW can't be generous either but it's a lesser as a metric for him clearly...... Only 5 people I think have gotten a nod in a film he's in (off the top of my head?) Dee, Caesar, Davis, Hawke, Hanks - how many of those did he allow to coattail - is that supposed to mean Davis? Hanks? Dee?......it just doesn't add up.
|
|