urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,825
Likes: 2,354
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 31, 2020 20:34:05 GMT
This is just my perspective, but when people discuss greatest actors, they usually discuss actors from 1950s-1970s. This is why I think DDL stands out. He's considered a GOAT, and he was not part of the 50s-70s club, and he's singled out as the greatest actor from after the 70s and that there's no one else even close. That's the common opinion I get. Not my personal opinion, but this is just the impression I get. I don't get the impression anyone else after 1970s is considered a GOAT in the same vein as Pacino or DeNiro.
In the 50s, there's Brando, Clift, Olivier, and Stewart.
In the 70s, there was Pacino, DeNiro, Nicholson, Hoffman, and Hackman.
But after the 70s, he's holding a place all alone up top. He's the only one talked about like he's Brando, DeNiro, or Pacino.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 31, 2020 20:42:50 GMT
Yeah, it's clearly going to be one of "those" conversations again , but in the real world, people talk alot more about Denzel Washington as a modern day GOAT than Day-Lewis.
Even within the industry, their reverence is similar (listen to how actors actors like Edward Norton talk about Washington as the greatest actor around). But with actual audiences....it's not even close. DDL is an industry pet. Washington has the industry and the crowd. And you might be shocked at how many people regard Washington as far better than Pacino and DeNiro.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 31, 2020 20:56:39 GMT
It's a great question and I think I have the gist of his appeal/mystique/legend down pretty well with this one fact: In his last 9 performances he got nominated for 5 Oscars (won 2). That is only exceeded by Pacino (5 in his first 8) and equals Brando (5 in his first 9). Now, I don't think he's "the" GOAT - he just doesn't have enough work for me, or variance within work type or less exotic roles too but I get why he is close to the very best for many - and he's a legit contender for such lofty praise......any metric you use to assess him he can stand with anyone - the lack of comedies hurts him - but as I've said many times when you don't do much work (19 films maybe iirc), something is going to suffer and that's the obvious thing. He's a lot closer to Paul Scofield than people realize but without Scofield's stage work - when you see him through the lens of Scofield you can assess his work/career better I think - he was Paul Scofield but as a star. I ranked him 3rd in our GOAT film poll for UK actors behind Olivier and Finney so I ranked him above Hopkins, O'Toole, Burton, Oldman........some people would say I still ranked him too low.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Aug 31, 2020 21:05:55 GMT
Btw it's the first time I see Clift being mentioned among the 3-4 best actors of the 50s... Maybe it's just me.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,825
Likes: 2,354
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 31, 2020 21:12:59 GMT
pupdurcs - Ya just can't help but make this about Denzel, can you? I've come to rely on you on that. And I agree, it's hard to compete with Denzel in the real world. But most of those guys haven't seen enough DDL to say. Not debating who's better, just pointing out this probable fact. And I think the fact that he's more contemporary makes teenagers more partial to Denzel than Pacino or DeNiro. Do you see how many Michael Jordan hating Lebron stans there are? They've never seen Michael Jordan play because they're not old enough. pacinoyes - I think the thing that distinguishes DDL is his ability to play larger than life characters. As much as people like Philip Seymour Hoffman, he doesn't have that ability, and I think that's a legitimate argument to make in Daniel's case. TerryMontana - I always thought next to Brando, Clift was the most well regarded actor of the 50s. I even mentioned Stewart (tho he's praised in a different vein) and Olivier (also praised in an entirely different vein). Who else is there?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 31, 2020 21:17:02 GMT
DDL is not Brando....not even close. Brando had the crowd (at least for a significant period of his career, he was an out and out movie star. One of the biggest in the world) not just the industry and critics. That missing component puts DDL closer to Frederic March territory. If you went back to the 1950's, you would find a lot of respected figures that would swear by March being the worlds greatest living actor. 70 years later, nobody gives a shit about him, despite bucketloads of acclaim and 2 Best Actor Oscars.
It's a shame, but DDL's lack of starpower/audience appeal (whatever you want to call it) is lethal to his longer term legacy. He's a special actor, but I can't see how he will be regarded as an era defining one.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 31, 2020 21:24:25 GMT
pupdurcs - Ya just can't help but make this about Denzel, can you? I've come to rely on you on that. And I agree, it's hard to compete with Denzel in the real world. But most of those guys haven't seen enough DDL to say. Not debating who's better, just pointing out this probable fact. And I think the fact that he's more contemporary makes teenagers more partial to Denzel than Pacino or DeNiro. Do you see how many Michael Jordan hating Lebron stans there are? They've never seen Michael Jordan play because they're not old enough. pacinoyes - I think the thing that distinguishes DDL is his ability to play larger than life characters. As much as people like Philip Seymour Hoffman, he doesn't have that ability, and I think that's a legitimate argument to make in his case. TerryMontana - I always thought next to Brando, Clift was the most well regarded actor of the 50s. I even mentioned Stewart (tho he's praised in a different vein) and Olivier (also praised in an entirely different vein). Who else is there? Bro, this was a clearly designed GOAT discussion. You made it about Denzel without even having to say his name . If we are having GOAT discissons, he's an automatic entry. I take no responsibility here I get what you are saying about the younger crowd maybe preferring Denzel to DePac due to being more contemporary, but you've seen those Harris Polls.... Washington has a broad demographic of fans across different ages, but in terms of support he does best with Boomers and older generations. The kind of folk who grew up with the 70's legends.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 31, 2020 21:25:29 GMT
TerryMontana - I always thought next to Brando, Clift was the most well regarded actor of the 50s. I even mentioned Stewart (tho he's praised in a different vein) and Olivier (also praised in an entirely different vein). Who else is there? Just to chime in here, I always say Bogart had almost as good a 50s in just half a decade as he had in the 40s (........and he owns the 40s imo). I know a lot of people like Douglas (and Holden) in the 50s and I do too - but Bogart literally invented the thing all actors try to do now where they echo roles they played as a young man later like every actor tries to do that: In the 50s he had The Caine Mutiny, In A Lonely Place (his best imo), Sabrina, Barefoot Contessa, The Harder They Fall, The Desperate Hours in just 6 years..... and they're not just great movies but he sort of used his persona in them to underscore his previous work........he has more too in the 50s - a wide range of work.....he never gets enough credit as an actual actor but he really should.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,670
Likes: 2,107
|
Post by cherry68 on Aug 31, 2020 21:31:29 GMT
I remember kowalski (old imdb user) called some Oscar winners "the Paul Muni of his era". Not sure people in some decades will remember ddl as one of the greatest actors. I mean, his most popular role (among the average audience) was in The last of the Mohicans.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 31, 2020 21:38:07 GMT
I remember kowalski (old imdb user) called some Oscar winners "the Paul Muni of his era". Not sure people in some decades will remember ddl as one of the greatest actors. I mean, his most popular role (among the average audience) was in The last of the Mohicans. Well I used to say DDL might end up the Paul Muni of his era on IMDB. Maybe I got that from kowalski or he got it from me. Hard to recall. But yeah, the gist may still stand. There's always a big industry fuss when DDL shows up for another role (and I think he will show up again), but it's hard to see how he'll have that audience appeal decades down the line as you said. He built the career he wanted, and it gave him great acclaim while he was active, but he should have done more to build a filmography with broader audience appeal, imho.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 31, 2020 21:40:24 GMT
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,825
Likes: 2,354
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 31, 2020 21:55:55 GMT
pacinoyes - Bogart definitely is king, but I always thought some people wrote him off because he started as a mediocre actor doing generic gangster movies for the longest time. You know some people don't like to let go of certain longtime perceptions. 1948 turned the corner for him imo. Casablanca happened somewhere in the middle of all that. But he definitely is king. I'd have him above Clift (because Clift just hasn't enough relevant films.... kind of what you say about DDL, I similarly barely remember Clift in most things) and WAY above Douglas. pupdurcs - You make a fair point, but I think DDL will be remembered. Standards have changed. In large part, the 30s and 40s in America have been forgotten because it just wasn't that great. That's why it took down Muni and March...(guys who might've been more acclaimed in their time). Just nobody wants to watch those old films anymore. It's kinda like the 80s. I love the 80s as a cinematic decade (outside of Hollywood at least), but I think most of the American films besides Amadeus and Raging Bull and Do the Right Thing have been forgotten. And we talk about the 90s and 00s more on this board. I think as long as PTA is remembered, DDL will be too. He was the engineer of his 2nd wave (post 2007++) of acting. And some of the newer people don't even remember the days where DDL was perceptively speaking...... the long haired romantic in Last of the Mohicans and The Crucible. Also, you're right about Denzel having such a wide demographic behind him. He's like Eastwood and Wayne, I think that's what Good_God missed in his argument. And NOT like DiCaprio or Pitt who's mostly adored by the 15-35 crowd.
|
|
futuretrunks
Based
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 1,420
Member is Online
|
Post by futuretrunks on Aug 31, 2020 23:08:59 GMT
pupdurcs - Ya just can't help but make this about Denzel, can you? I've come to rely on you on that. And I agree, it's hard to compete with Denzel in the real world. But most of those guys haven't seen enough DDL to say. Not debating who's better, just pointing out this probable fact. And I think the fact that he's more contemporary makes teenagers more partial to Denzel than Pacino or DeNiro. Do you see how many Michael Jordan hating Lebron stans there are? They've never seen Michael Jordan play because they're not old enough. pacinoyes - I think the thing that distinguishes DDL is his ability to play larger than life characters. As much as people like Philip Seymour Hoffman, he doesn't have that ability, and I think that's a legitimate argument to make in Daniel's case. TerryMontana - I always thought next to Brando, Clift was the most well regarded actor of the 50s. I even mentioned Stewart (tho he's praised in a different vein) and Olivier (also praised in an entirely different vein). Who else is there? Mission: Impossible 3. Charlie Wilson's War.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,712
Likes: 4,820
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Aug 31, 2020 23:22:50 GMT
Yeah, it's clearly going to be one of "those" conversations again
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 1, 2020 0:14:16 GMT
The problem for Day-Lewis, just like any other actor post-De Niro/Pacino/Nicholson, is that he doesn't have a Godfather. He doesn't have a One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Let alone multiple of them like De Niro does with Raging Bull and Taxi Driver and even The Godfather II. That kind of iconic performance in an iconic film that is revered by everybody from general audiences to cinephiles to critics to filmmakers, all over the world. There Will Be Blood comes the closest, but let's not even pretend like it even comes close to something like The Godfather.
But while Day-Lewis doesn't really approach Brando or De Niro in overall esteem, I agree with the general sentiment that he is probably the most revered actor since. For one, he actually has top actors calling him the greatest (Bradley Cooper, for one), and you don't have to resort to putting words into Edward Norton's mouth to make that case for him. Not to mention, he is also arguably the most acclaimed actor since Jack Nicholson.
While he will never realistically compete with Brando or even De Niro, the Muni comparisons are pretty idiotic for a number of reasons. One, a primary reason Muni was so well regarded in his time was because of his performances on stage, which people at the time actually watched. Once those people died out and his stage performances became irrelevant (as they almost always do, because stage performances do not last like film performances do for obvious reasons), people stopped giving a shit about him because his movies weren't all that. Paul Muni is a great example for why a stage career doesn't mean much in the long term and how your legacy is built on the strength of your filmography. He's a stupid analogy for a film actor like Day-Lewis that has all of his acclaim from film performances, which are imprinted into celluloid for generations to watch. And Muni's film career is not even comparable in acclaim to Day-Lewis's film career.
PS: It's cute that urbanpatrician persists with the lunacy about DiCaprio, who is far and away the favorite actor for general audiences around the world, but it's not even worth debating. People are welcome to their delusions.
|
|
futuretrunks
Based
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 1,420
Member is Online
|
Post by futuretrunks on Sept 1, 2020 0:21:47 GMT
DDL's problem is more that he doesn't even have a Remember the Titans. He's invisible as a cultural figure beyond the sparks of Bill the Butcher (which is a genius performance, but not in an iconic Marty movie like Goodfellas or The Departed). One could make the case that DDL was never in a truly popular movie. And that's going to be damning when his filmography is that scanty.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 1, 2020 0:46:06 GMT
DDL's problem is more that he doesn't even have a Remember the Titans. He's invisible as a cultural figure beyond the sparks of Bill the Butcher (which is a genius performance, but not in an iconic Marty movie like Goodfellas or The Departed). One could make the case that DDL was never in a truly popular movie. And that's going to be damning when his filmography is that scanty. What's your definition of a "truly popular movie"? Gangs of New York and Lincoln made more money than Remember the Titans. I'm also interested in where you draw the line. If The Departed is your benchmark for a truly popular movie, only Tom Hanks has movies that are more culturally significant among the highly acclaimed actors of Day-Lewis's generation.
|
|
futuretrunks
Based
Posts: 3,193
Likes: 1,420
Member is Online
|
Post by futuretrunks on Sept 1, 2020 2:15:42 GMT
DDL's problem is more that he doesn't even have a Remember the Titans. He's invisible as a cultural figure beyond the sparks of Bill the Butcher (which is a genius performance, but not in an iconic Marty movie like Goodfellas or The Departed). One could make the case that DDL was never in a truly popular movie. And that's going to be damning when his filmography is that scanty. What's your definition of a "truly popular movie"? Gangs of New York and Lincoln made more money than Remember the Titans. I'm also interested in where you draw the line. If The Departed is your benchmark for a truly popular movie, only Tom Hanks has movies that are more culturally significant among the highly acclaimed actors of Day-Lewis's generation. Something people talk about with some frequency. I'm speaking for myself, but I've never heard people randomly talking about Lincoln in public. That was a Spielberg movie about the most venerated American president, so of course it had some buzz when it came out. I don't hear people talking about that like E.T. or Close Encounters or Jurassic Park or Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan etc. It came and it went, like Bridge of Spies (another film that won an undeserving acting Oscar). And Gangs made money, but it was Leo's second return to a lead role after Titanic, and with Weinstein onboard. The healthy gross was hardly because of DDL, even though he was by far the best thing about the movie besides Ferretti's production design.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,825
Likes: 2,354
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 2:22:54 GMT
What's your definition of a "truly popular movie"? Gangs of New York and Lincoln made more money than Remember the Titans. I'm also interested in where you draw the line. If The Departed is your benchmark for a truly popular movie, only Tom Hanks has movies that are more culturally significant among the highly acclaimed actors of Day-Lewis's generation. Something people talk about with some frequency. I'm speaking for myself, but I've never heard people randomly talking about Lincoln in public. That was a Spielberg movie about the most venerated American president, so of course it had some buzz when it came out. I don't hear people talking about that like E.T. or Close Encounters or Jurassic Park or Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan etc. It came and it went, like Bridge of Spies (another film that won an undeserving acting Oscar). And Gangs made money, but it was Leo's second return to a lead role after Titanic, and with Weinstein onboard. The healthy gross was hardly because of DDL, even though he was by far the best thing about the movie besides Ferretti's production design. The reason for that, futuretrunks, is that the 2010s was a garbage decade. It's comparable to the 30s and 40s. And the 80s speaking of solely the Hollywood output. This entire decade will not be remembered, and anything released during the decade regardless how promising it originally seemed is destined to be inherently disadvantaged. (Like Lincoln) The Wolf of Wall Street is my favorite film of the decade, and should ideally be DiCaprio's opus. But I don't hear about that as much as Goodfellas or Taxi Driver. And comparatively not as much as Titanic among DiCaprio movies. Or maybe Gangs of New York.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 2:23:56 GMT
While he will never realistically compete with Brando or even De Niro, the Muni comparisons are pretty idiotic for a number of reasons. ^ Correct. I wasn't going to get involved with the Paul Muni comparison because I love Muni and his place in acting and covered him in the "Stage/TV/Film" thread but he is not like DDL in the way that is being suggested here. First of all, Muni's not British which kind of matters (unlike Paul Scofield who I mentioned and is more recent and connected to DDL - a DDL co-star - he was also a stage actor, so people don't have to strain to go back to Muni). Secondly there was less "of him" in his acting in the way we think of it now - so Muni seems more removed from even his best work than DDL does from his..........and the crucial thing is that Brando and The Method were seen as invalidating Muni and Barrymore in what they conveyed to audiences. Now some of that is bullsh it and Brando admired Muni too....... but Day-Lewis is much more seen AS Brando. That's a big difference....no one "invalidated" DDL ........... DDL was the change that Muni could not be, so a lot of revisionism in that Muni-DDL similarities thing tbh.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Sept 1, 2020 2:36:22 GMT
He's a lot closer to Paul Scofield than people realize but without Scofield's stage work - when you see him through the lens of Scofield you can assess his work/career better I think - he was Paul Scofield but as a star. Mark Rylance is more like Scofield than Day-Lewis. A much lauded theater performer who appeared in films yet only sparsely, and won an Oscar from his first nomination. Now Rylance is starting to perhaps move away from that himself, but that's the better comparison. Day-Lewis does hold sway to the general public more than you guys are giving him credit for. I've heard non-cinefile types bring up Day-Lewis in conversation, usually regarding his work in Lincoln, which is much heralded but also random mentions for There Will Be Blood and Gangs of New York. The simple fact of the matter is, the man won 3 Oscars, and him being viewed as the "great actor" is a perspective held beyond strictly cinefiles. Is it as widespread as it theoretically could be? No, but he's definitely far more known in the general sphere than Scofield was.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Sept 1, 2020 2:41:13 GMT
DDL's problem is more that he doesn't even have a Remember the Titans. He's invisible as a cultural figure beyond the sparks of Bill the Butcher (which is a genius performance, but not in an iconic Marty movie like Goodfellas or The Departed). One could make the case that DDL was never in a truly popular movie. And that's going to be damning when his filmography is that scanty. Lincoln made more money at the Box Office than Remember the Titans.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 2:46:49 GMT
He's a lot closer to Paul Scofield than people realize but without Scofield's stage work - when you see him through the lens of Scofield you can assess his work/career better I think - he was Paul Scofield but as a star. Mark Rylance is more like Scofield than Day-Lewis. Maybe ...............but you know, Rylance came AFTER. I mean it isn't a "who is THE MOST like Paul Scofield contest" after all There was no Rylance yet on our film radar to assess DDL's film career in comparison with............ and to put it into context while it was actually happening .........except for Scofield-DDL imo.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Sept 1, 2020 2:54:53 GMT
Mark Rylance is more like Scofield than Day-Lewis. Maybe ...............but you know, Rylance came AFTER. I mean it isn't a "who is THE MOST like Paul Scofield contest" after all There was no Rylance yet on our film radar to assess DDL's film career in comparison with............ and to put it into context while it was actually happening .........except for Scofield-DDL imo. Well we're talking about "all time" here so that shouldn't matter...I also wasn't referring to it as a contest to be "most like", but rather the most apt comparison as it currently stands. DDL currently is closer to how Olivier was in terms of a general public perception.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 3:05:53 GMT
Maybe ...............but you know, Rylance came AFTER. I mean it isn't a "who is THE MOST like Paul Scofield contest" after all There was no Rylance yet on our film radar to assess DDL's film career in comparison with............ and to put it into context while it was actually happening .........except for Scofield-DDL imo. Well we're talking about "all time" here so that shouldn't matter...I also wasn't referring to it as a contest to be "most like", but rather the most apt comparison as it currently stands. DDL currently is closer to how Olivier was in terms of a general public perception.
I can't agree with the Olivier public perception. Olivier was actually incredibly prolific on film and stage. His reputation as the Shakespearian Actor was smothering. Plus, he was a "movie star". People were interested in his relationships (ie his marriage to Vivien Leigh) as much as his work. DDL is too private for that. With Day-Lewis, a lot of general audiences couldn't even name you two of his movies. Yes, he's far better known than Scolfield was . I feel DDL's public perception is as a great actor, but there is no particular attachment to him with general audiences. When he isn't around, people move on pretty quick.
|
|