|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 3:08:21 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.
Of course it should matter - if you say it doesn't matter you lose context which was MY whole point (you learn about DDL through Scofield's model, fnck Rylance in this case). DDL is like Olivier but you know, not in some pivotal ways - in amount of filmed work taken in his career much closer to Scofield, in amount of films before he won his 1st Oscar - Scofield........... in the range of roles/type of material in film - again Scofield, and DDL co-starred with Scofield too. It's not a perfect comparison though........sure, I see some Olivier similarities too and with others as well.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Sept 1, 2020 3:14:13 GMT
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. Getting too complicated old boy...general public perception can often be a simplistic thing. DDL is the current public shorthand for "Great actor" from the British isles at least, over his contemporaries hence the comparison.
Besides one to one copies of careers is never a thing, unless you're Kenneth Branagh who seemed to actively want to be Olivier in every respect, right down to even sort of the "tabloid affair" element, though I'd argue he never quite made it in that regard, despite obviously still finding plenty of acclaim.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,818
Likes: 2,351
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 3:14:56 GMT
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 Scholfield 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. I agree. I don't think he's Olivier either. Olivier was a pretty big star and was a household name, tho his films just didn't have inherently as large an audience as more iconic films of the 50s. Like Bridge on the River Kwai, Ben-Hur, A Streetcar Named Desire, etc. He had less people interested in his Shakespeare adaptations, but that doesn't mean there was no one interested. Just less by a simple numbers count. Comparatively, his films may have lost audience through the years where movies like All About Eve, Sunset Blvd., and Singin' in the Rain ended up being singled out, because those had ya know....huge entertainment value. The main reason I think DDL will endure is because this PTA period from 2007-2017 made too large a splash during its time that he's unlikely to be obscured in the future. When something is THAT huge, it probably doesn't go away. Maybe not huge in a box office context, but Raging Bull wasn't a huge box office hit either, but it's clearly not forgotten.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 1, 2020 3:31:28 GMT
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. So it's just anecdotal? Kind of like when urbanpatrician was arguing that John Malkovich was the draw for The Man in the Iron Mask because his grandmother fancied him or whatever? Do you hear people talking about Remember the Titans like it's ET or Jurassic Park? If Lincoln just "came and went", Remember the Titans barely came and swiftly went.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 1, 2020 3:37:39 GMT
Maybe not huge in a box office context, but Pulp Fiction wasn't a box office hit either. Nobody would say Pulp Fiction will be forgotten. LOL
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,818
Likes: 2,351
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 4:03:15 GMT
Maybe not huge in a box office context, but Pulp Fiction wasn't a box office hit either. Nobody would say Pulp Fiction will be forgotten. LOL Ok, you got me with that. I was thinking Reservoir Dogs, but the wrong movie came out. But it's nice to see you can't let go of that John Malkovich thing. What you fail to realize is that Malkovich actually holds stronger appeal to men above the age of 35 who only went to see DiCaprio movies in the 90s because they had to take their kid with them. I know you're gonna count every seat that ever went to see your guy, but a lot of them only took their kid with them. I don't know what goes on in Russia or whatever, but here in America.... DiCaprio is mostly a 15-35 yo thing. Now, you can argue that he persisted much longer than Malkovich who pretty much came and went as his time was done. But during the 90s, I heard more about Malkovich than DiCaprio. There's an adult circle, and a 12 yo girls' circle, but you wouldn't know anything about that, would you? Btw, I definitely agree Lincoln came and went. Whether Remember the Titans did or didn't.... idk and I guess idc.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 1, 2020 4:10:28 GMT
But it's nice to see you can't let go of that John Malkovich thing. What you fail to realize is that Malkovich actually holds stronger appeal to men above the age of 35 who only went to see DiCaprio movies in the 90s because they had to take their kid with them. I know you're gonna count every seat that ever went to see your guy, but a lot of them only took their kid with them. I think you've already proved that you were living under a rock in the '90s, you really don't need to demonstrate it over and over again (like with the Pulp Fiction comment today).
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,818
Likes: 2,351
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 4:16:46 GMT
But it's nice to see you can't let go of that John Malkovich thing. What you fail to realize is that Malkovich actually holds stronger appeal to men above the age of 35 who only went to see DiCaprio movies in the 90s because they had to take their kid with them. I know you're gonna count every seat that ever went to see your guy, but a lot of them only took their kid with them. I think you've already proved that you were living under a rock in the '90s, you really don't need to demonstrate it over and over again (like with the Pulp Fiction comment today). What men above the age of 35 cared about DiCaprio in the 90s? Thanks for playing tho. His audience was large with women and children, but I could easily reason that Jackie Chan and Wesley Snipes were bigger based on my perception. Trailers of their films were consistently on TV all throughout the 90s. The only other guys I couldn't avoid as much as those was Nicolas Cage, Tom Hanks, and Will Smith. DiCaprio seemed targeted to the youth which can easily be overlooked by adults. That all happened before I counted box office stats and numbers. Some people don't do that before the advent of the internet, but you use box office to justify everything.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Sept 1, 2020 5:18:04 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? I was going to say Bogart also. There were other guys like Cooper and Grant although I don't think they were ever considered among the GOATs. They just had the star quality. As for Monty, he had a short life and a short career. That's why I wouldn't put him in my 50s list. But he had the skills to be there, for sure.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 9:22:52 GMT
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. Getting too complicated old boy...general public perception can often be a simplistic thing. DDL is the current public shorthand for "Great actor" from the British isles at least, over his contemporaries hence the comparison.
Besides one to one copies of careers is never a thing, unless you're Kenneth Branagh who seemed to actively want to be Olivier in every respect, right down to even sort of the "tabloid affair" element, though I'd argue he never quite made it in that regard, despite obviously still finding plenty of acclaim.
See, I slightly disagree here. I think DDL is probably a shorthand for "great actor" with certain sections of the media/critics and within much of the film industry. These days, I don't think the public actively give much thought to DDL at all (maybe when he won his 3rd Oscar, and his hype and publicity was at his peak, they cared a bit, but that has died down considerably). Out of sight, out of mind and all that. His godlike status within the film industry and critics/media can understandably make people overestimate his cache with the public. Just from personal experience, but when I talk to non-cinephiles about favorite actors or the "best" actors, DDL rarely comes up in conversation. I'll usually hear far more mentions of someone like Christian Bale, who a lot of cinephiles might see as DDL-Lite. But it's the nature of how DDL built his career....he's a massive industry/critical darling, but his choices are not conducive to maintaining long term public interest.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 10:57:45 GMT
One of the interesting things about DDL - and there are a lot, and not all positive - is the way he stands apart from his UK rivals (Oldman, Fiennes) far more than any other actor in modern times. Even on this board we like the idea of the rival - but you can't really say Oldman after a certain point was a "threat" to DDL and Fiennes even less (although I love both). I always say - you have to compare actors by country and generation first and foremost - before you can rank them as "best" ever - well Day-Lewis sort of was given his generation of actors by default in how Oldman and Fiennes managed their careers: and no British actor with 2 Oscars has a BA even at all (Ustinov, Caine) - so in that way he's TRIPLED his peers in that metric (not the "only" metric but it's a clear one at least). That's a pretty astonishing feat and like that "5 Oscar nods in 8 or 9 roles" Pacino/Brando level thing I mentioned earlier....it's metric smashing and relative to his direct rivals it's also a bigger gap than any of the GOATs has over any other of their generation/country peers - post 1950s at least.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Sept 1, 2020 19:16:24 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be:
1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson
Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 19:45:53 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be: 1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix I never understood why people factor "the general public" into anything ........the "general public" are morons anyway - ok I'm kind of kidding but really when people go to that metric it's to argue a lesser actor as an equivalent of a greater one and to put yourself in the head of dumb people. I mean there's a place for that argument BUT the way people have argued "against" Day-Lewis in this thread and I don't have him THAT high (like I said 3rd for UK actors behind Olivier and Finney for me but a top 10 all time US/UK guy) but once you start arguing that some moron has never liked or seen The Unbearable Lightness of Being because there's not enough guns in it, you've moved far away from a legitimate GOAT discussion anyway.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 20:23:51 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be: 1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix The general public are always part of the equation in modern popular culture. It makes no sense to act as if it's a seperate thing. Even the term "popular culture" gives it away. The very top guys have high level of skill and talent, and are also popular and have a wide appeal. The guys at the top of the tree in GOAT convos have "the crowd" (a little parlance from Gladiator. Maximus was considered the greatest gladiator, not only because he had the skills, but the crowd loved him ). Why do you think all these top GOAT contenders are almost exclusively movie stars and leading men? Why aren't Steve Buscemi or John C Reilly top tier GOAT contenders? Willem Dafoe wins best actor polls on this board, but in the real world, nobody gives a shit and he isn't a fixture in any GOAT discussions. They are all pretty good and skillful actors. But they don't have the crowd. That's just fucking reality. If people don't care, eventually you will fade or not be part of the conversation at all. For me, the most secure GOAT contenders, tend to have a combination of the general public (the crowd), critical regard, industry regard, and peer worship. DDL never had the crowd, so it'll always be dicey how he's percieved in the long term. Pacino, DeNiro, Brando and Nicholson are up there if we are taking modern popular culture. They all had the crowd at one point and were insanely popular at their peaks, and intrinsic parts of our cultural discourse. DDL, though the media and industry have attempted to give him that cultural cache that comes with having the crowd....never really had it. DDL is high in the conversation for now (especially among film buffs) , because he has the other things, but not having the crowd is a huge, huge long term drawback for him. Is Willem Dafoe a "better" actor than Jack Nicholson? Probably. But he'll never be anywhere near Jack in GOAT debates because he never had the crowd like Jack had in the palm of his hands. How audiences relate and are impacted by you 100% does and will affect an actors GOAT standing.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Sept 1, 2020 20:52:22 GMT
DDL certainly has some cultural cache. He is shorthand for eccentric method acting, a brand that gets mocked (RDJ's character in Tropic Thunder) and aped off (Jared Leto's bullshit with Suicide Squad). Gangs of New York and The Last of the Mohicans have had healthy lives being broadcast on TV, There Will Be Blood is one of the 10 most acclaimed films of the century and "I drink your milkshake" was a meme, and he has forever changed the voice anybody would do to imitate Abraham Lincoln.
Is he as popular as some other actors? No, but trying to read the tea leaves on whose popularity will stand the test of time is a foolhardy exercise. As DDL said in Lincoln quoting Banquo from Macbeth, "if you can look into the seeds of time and say which grain will grow and which will not, speak then to me." Until then, it is mere conjecture.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,818
Likes: 2,351
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 21:00:45 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be: 1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix Willem Dafoe wins best actor polls on this board, but in the real world, nobody gives a shit and he isn't a fixture in any GOAT discussions. They are all pretty good and skillful actors. But they don't have the crowd. That's just fucking reality. If people don't care, eventually you will fade or not be part of the conversation at all.
You don't think people in the real world cares about Willem Dafoe?I don't think they know him for The Lighthouse or At Eternity's Gate tho. They know him for Platoon, The Last Temptation of Christ, Body of Evidence (with Madonna), Spider Man. Guy is pretty popular to anybody who's watched a whole bunch of movies year in and year out, although he seemed to be bigger during the 80s. But he's definitely been ingrained in our memories throughout a long course of time. Steve Buscemi seemed mostly a 90s thing. He had somewhat success in the 90s, but I felt he started to fade a bit after Spider-Man 2. The last time I had memory of him in anything important. I think Dafoe is more well known than Bale, Phoenix, PSH, or Gosling. I don't think most people care about those guys outside of newer film buffs and the under-35 crowd. The above 35 crowd don't really care if anyone have the "great actor" label. They kinda go with what they like, in which case I think Russell Crowe (however brief his run was), Sean Penn, and Willem Dafoe have a bigger place in culture than the guys who this board talks about more than usual like Bale, Phoenix, or PSH. I think an interesting actor is Jeff Bridges. Guy is pretty popular, and been around forever. But outside of The Big Lebowski, I don't think the real world cares to remember him in most things. I think Sean Penn has more popularity in this regard, because this guy was a celebrity in the 80s, became a serious actor in the 90s, and in the 00s got his 3 most famous roles (I Am Sam, Mystic River, Milk), the films that define his current reputation.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 21:03:52 GMT
DDL certainly has some cultural cache. He is shorthand for eccentric method acting, a brand that gets mocked (RDJ's character in Tropic Thunder) and aped off (Jared Leto's bullshit with Suicide Squad). Honestly, a lot of people thought RDJ was mocking Russell Crowe in Tropic Thunder, not DDL. Especially since the character Kirk Lazarus was supposed to be Australian. It made sense....Crowe was huge at the time, an extremely commited actor (whom a lot of people assumed to be method) . I read that RDJ did base his role on a combo of Crowe, DDL and Colin Farrell. But it makes sense why so many audience members saw Crowe as the main inspiration. Not saying DDL had zero cultural cache, but compared to most of the guys he's put up with in GOAT debates, being real, it's not really much cache.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,706
Likes: 4,813
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Sept 1, 2020 21:06:14 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be: 1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix The general public are always part of the equation in modern popular culture. It makes no sense to act as if it's a seperate thing. Even the term "popular culture" gives it away. The very top guys have high level of skill and talent, and are also popular and have a wide appeal. The guys at the top of the tree in GOAT convos have "the crowd" (a little parlance from Gladiator. Maximus was considered the greatest gladiator, not only because he had the skills, but the crowd loved him ). Why do you think all these top GOAT contenders are almost exclusively movie stars and leading men? Why aren't Steve Buscemi or John C Reilly top tier GOAT contenders? Willem Dafoe wins best actor polls on this board, but in the real world, nobody gives a shit and he isn't a fixture in any GOAT discussions. They are all pretty good and skillful actors. But they don't have the crowd. That's just fucking reality. If people don't care, eventually you will fade or not be part of the conversation at all. For me, the most secure GOAT contenders, tend to have a combination of the general public (the crowd), critical regard, industry regard, and peer worship. DDL never had the crowd, so it'll always be dicey how he's percieved in the long term. Pacino, DeNiro, Brando and Nicholson are up there if we are taking modern popular culture. They all had the crowd at one point and were insanely popular at their peaks, and intrinsic parts of our cultural discourse. DDL, though the media and industry have attempted to give him that cultural cache that comes with having the crowd....never really had it. DDL is high in the conversation for now (especially among film buffs) , because he has the other things, but not having the crowd is a huge, huge long term drawback for him. Is Willem Dafoe a "better" actor than Jack Nicholson? Probably. But he'll never be anywhere near Jack in GOAT debates because he never had the crowd like Jack had in the palm of his hands. How audiences relate and are impacted by you 100% does and will affect an actors GOAT standing.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 21:09:05 GMT
Willem Dafoe wins best actor polls on this board, but in the real world, nobody gives a shit and he isn't a fixture in any GOAT discussions. They are all pretty good and skillful actors. But they don't have the crowd. That's just fucking reality. If people don't care, eventually you will fade or not be part of the conversation at all.
You don't think people in the real world cares about Willem Dafoe?I don't think they know him for The Lighthouse or At Eternity's Gate tho. They know him for Platoon, The Last Temptation of Christ, Body of Evidence (with Madonna), Spider Man. Guy is pretty popular to anybody who's watched a whole bunch of movies year in and year out, although he seemed to be bigger during the 80s. But he's definitely been ingrained in our memories throughout a long course of time. Steve Buscemi seemed mostly a 90s thing. He had somewhat success in the 90s, but I felt he started to fade a bit after Spider-Man 2. The last time I had memory of him in anything important. I think Dafoe is more well known than Bale, Phoenix, PSH, or Gosling. I don't think most people care about those guys outside of newer film buffs and the under-35 crowd. The above 35 crowd don't really care if anyone have the "great actor" label. They kinda go with what they like, in which case I think Russell Crowe (however brief his run was), Sean Penn, and Willem Dafoe have a bigger place in culture than the guys who this board talks about more than general like Bale, Phoenix, or PSH. I think an interesting actor is Jeff Bridges. Guy is pretty popular, and been around forever. But outside of The Big Lebowski, I don't think the real world cares to remember him in most things. I think Sean Penn has more popularity in this regard, because this guy was a celebrity in the 80s, became a serious actor in the 90s, and in the 00s got his 3 most famous roles (I Am Sam, Mystic River, Milk), the films that define his current reputation. I guess maybe that came out wrong. Dafoe is a well liked, reliable character actor by the public with a long career. And he's probably best known to general audiences as the Green Goblin. But honestly, if you surveyed the general public about who the "greatest working actors" were, I'd be shocked if Dafoe's name showed up. He doesn't register with them in that sense. His most acclaimed stuff tends to be little seen.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,818
Likes: 2,351
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Sept 1, 2020 21:17:48 GMT
You don't think people in the real world cares about Willem Dafoe?I don't think they know him for The Lighthouse or At Eternity's Gate tho. They know him for Platoon, The Last Temptation of Christ, Body of Evidence (with Madonna), Spider Man. Guy is pretty popular to anybody who's watched a whole bunch of movies year in and year out, although he seemed to be bigger during the 80s. But he's definitely been ingrained in our memories throughout a long course of time. Steve Buscemi seemed mostly a 90s thing. He had somewhat success in the 90s, but I felt he started to fade a bit after Spider-Man 2. The last time I had memory of him in anything important. I think Dafoe is more well known than Bale, Phoenix, PSH, or Gosling. I don't think most people care about those guys outside of newer film buffs and the under-35 crowd. The above 35 crowd don't really care if anyone have the "great actor" label. They kinda go with what they like, in which case I think Russell Crowe (however brief his run was), Sean Penn, and Willem Dafoe have a bigger place in culture than the guys who this board talks about more than general like Bale, Phoenix, or PSH. I think an interesting actor is Jeff Bridges. Guy is pretty popular, and been around forever. But outside of The Big Lebowski, I don't think the real world cares to remember him in most things. I think Sean Penn has more popularity in this regard, because this guy was a celebrity in the 80s, became a serious actor in the 90s, and in the 00s got his 3 most famous roles (I Am Sam, Mystic River, Milk), the films that define his current reputation. I guess maybe that came out wrong. Dafoe is a well liked, reliable character actor by the public with a long career. And he's probably best known to general audiences as the Green Goblin. But honestly, if you surveyed the general public about who the "greatest working actors" were, I'd be shocked if Dafoe's name showed up. He doesn't register with them in that sense. His most acclaimed stuff tends to be little seen. No, he certainly won't. He's like Ralph Fiennes or Jeff Bridges. Guys who are slightly an afterthought in the general public's eyes even though they've been in famous movies, a lot of them are ignored. But most people know who they are, they just don't think to remember them much outside of a few key roles (The English Patient, Schindler's List, Lebowski, Spider Man, Temptation of Christ, Platoon).... the main canon. Tho I think you might be overthinking this a little. DDL's huge praise is mostly because he's contemporary. He's mostly talked about here these days for There Will Be Blood, Lincoln, and Phantom Thread. People here are young, some of them don't remember anything before 2007. This is why guys like PSH, Bale, Gosling, and Phoenix are hot topics here. Nobody in the real world cares about them outside of a couple of films. Gosling is mostly debated for his looks, but mostly among young girls. He doesn't much appeal to older women apart from discussions of if they find him hot or not.... in which case they might, but that won't make them go see his films. Majority of mothers and grandmothers don't register him outside of "hmmm, what a handsome young man" talks with their daughter.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 1, 2020 21:22:54 GMT
Meh, a lot of this is twisting ourselves in knots as a way to limit or let in actors to this hypothetical "GOAT" list that is usually composed of actors who audiences find cool it's a big circle jerk tbh. I think Willem Dafoe would have better odds to be considered a better actor than Jack Nicholson if he had 1 BA Oscar tbh.....I don't think anyone would scoff at PSH being considered equal or better than Nicholson .......same thing here that's what separates PSH from Dafoe and personally I rank PSH in that top 10 American film actor group.... This is part of the "alternative Rock music" rationale of assessing greatness in a way too - what if there was a band as good as The Rolling Stones who didn't sell anywhere near them (actually um, that's The Replacements ) where the very cult appeal is part of the mystique too but do people not say that and elevate Coldplay or something? It's just too amorphous to put into a discussion .........great is great.....
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Sept 1, 2020 21:39:26 GMT
DDL certainly has some cultural cache. He is shorthand for eccentric method acting, a brand that gets mocked (RDJ's character in Tropic Thunder) and aped off (Jared Leto's bullshit with Suicide Squad). Honestly, a lot of people thought RDJ was mocking Russell Crowe in Tropic Thunder, not DDL. Especially since the character Kirk Lazarus was supposed to be Australian. It made sense....Crowe was huge at the time, an extremely commited actor (whom a lot of people assumed to be method) . I read that RDJ did base his role on a combo of Crowe, DDL and Colin Farrell. But it makes sense why so many audience members saw Crowe as the main inspiration. Not saying DDL had zero cultural cache, but compared to most of the guys he's put up with in GOAT debates, being real, it's not really much cache. Kirk Lazarus was Australian because that's an accent RDJ had already done before in Natural Born Killers and felt comfortable with. The character was originally going to be Irish, which fits both DDL and Colin Farrell. Either way, we're still talking about a character lampooning what is much more significantly DDL's brand than Crowe's, especially as time has passed, and that was always based in some part on DDL.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Sept 1, 2020 23:37:46 GMT
No, the top 5 GOATs in modern popular culture are perceived to be: 1. Brando 2. DeNiro 3. Pacino 4. Day-Lewis 5. Nicholson Then (always according to general public) there are actors like DiCaprio, Washington, Bale, Hanks, and Phoenix I never understood why people factor "the general public" into anything ........the "general public" are morons anyway - ok I'm kind of kidding but really when people go to that metric it's to argue a lesser actor as an equivalent of a greater one and to put yourself in the head of dumb people. I mean there's a place for that argument BUT the way people have argued "against" Day-Lewis in this thread and I don't have him THAT high (like I said 3rd for UK actors behind Olivier and Finney for me but a top 10 all time US/UK guy) but once you start arguing that some moron has never liked or seen The Unbearable Lightness of Being because there's not enough guns in it, you've moved far away from a legitimate GOAT discussion anyway. Ultimately, the highest level of artistic achievement accomplished with some frequency will achieve a noticeable measure of popularity. Bjork and Radiohead are platinum selling artists. Shakespeare was the greatest human mind of all time IMO, and massively popular. DDL only vaguely managing to make a connection with the masses in the most visceral artistic medium (drawing upon sight and sound, and language) speaks to something.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Sept 1, 2020 23:40:35 GMT
I never understood why people factor "the general public" into anything ........the "general public" are morons anyway - ok I'm kind of kidding but really when people go to that metric it's to argue a lesser actor as an equivalent of a greater one and to put yourself in the head of dumb people. I mean there's a place for that argument BUT the way people have argued "against" Day-Lewis in this thread and I don't have him THAT high (like I said 3rd for UK actors behind Olivier and Finney for me but a top 10 all time US/UK guy) but once you start arguing that some moron has never liked or seen The Unbearable Lightness of Being because there's not enough guns in it, you've moved far away from a legitimate GOAT discussion anyway. Ultimately, the highest level of artistic achievement accomplished with some frequency will achieve a noticeable measure of popularity. Bjork and Radiohead are platinum selling artists. Shakespeare was the greatest human mind of all time IMO, and massively popular. DDL only vaguely managing to make a connection with the masses in the most visceral artistic medium (drawing upon sight and sound, and language) speaks to something. Bingo!
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 2, 2020 0:19:40 GMT
I never understood why people factor "the general public" into anything ........the "general public" are morons anyway - ok I'm kind of kidding but really when people go to that metric it's to argue a lesser actor as an equivalent of a greater one and to put yourself in the head of dumb people. I mean there's a place for that argument BUT the way people have argued "against" Day-Lewis in this thread and I don't have him THAT high (like I said 3rd for UK actors behind Olivier and Finney for me but a top 10 all time US/UK guy) but once you start arguing that some moron has never liked or seen The Unbearable Lightness of Being because there's not enough guns in it, you've moved far away from a legitimate GOAT discussion anyway. Ultimately, the highest level of artistic achievement accomplished with some frequency will achieve a noticeable measure of popularity. Bjork and Radiohead are platinum selling artists. Highly dubious ................Sleater-Kinney isn't a Bjork in sales but artistically they are quite comparable in their artistry in the same exact period. Van Gogh never sold a painting in his lifetime.......there is no connection between popular success and depth of artistry in any Art form, I won't bore you by listing the "other Van Goghs" in other mediums. Like I said there's a place for the popular argument but none of it corresponds to "best"........there's no place for it there at all.
|
|