|
Post by franklin on May 20, 2021 1:27:43 GMT
Both movie stars who defined an era, but who's the better actor: Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp??
Vote and comment.
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on May 20, 2021 1:29:33 GMT
Neither. Fuck them both.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on May 20, 2021 1:31:43 GMT
Depp, easily
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on May 20, 2021 1:47:08 GMT
Tree of Life and Fight Club are probably better than anything Depp's done but the thing is Pitt is pretty meh aside from that. Depp is pretty much always good so I voted for him.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on May 20, 2021 1:48:46 GMT
I'll take Pitt 90% of the time.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on May 20, 2021 2:08:04 GMT
Pitt has shown so much more range. He's a better dramatic actor, comedic actor, and a vastly more charismatic movie star all-round. Depp is fun in PoTC and Sweeney Todd.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on May 20, 2021 2:09:40 GMT
Depp used to be a pretty inspired, soulful actor but after 2003 he went hard into gimmickry with rare glimpses of that earlier inspiration.
Pitt went through an early learning curve of having to figure out his on-screen charisma while working out his better character actor tendencies and now plays as one of the more self-assured actors around. Plus, I'll take his performance in Fight Club over anything Depp did.
|
|
|
Post by TheAlwaysClassy on May 20, 2021 2:45:27 GMT
Depp is the better actor overall but Pitt has a much better filmography especially since the mid-00s. Depp has become a parody of himself.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on May 20, 2021 4:39:10 GMT
Pitt. Better actor, better filmography.
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on May 20, 2021 5:15:56 GMT
Pitt.
I don't find either particularly interesting or engaging when doing straight man roles but Pitt has been more consistent overall and has more work I've liked.
|
|
|
Post by MoonShadow on May 20, 2021 5:53:34 GMT
Pitt
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 2,920
Likes: 1,435
Member is Online
|
Post by Nikan on May 20, 2021 7:23:30 GMT
These days, Pitt. For life, Depp.
|
|
futuretrunks
Based
Posts: 3,129
Likes: 1,398
Member is Online
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 20, 2021 19:45:27 GMT
I'm going with Pitt, rather easily. Through 97 or so it's not clear to me, but Pitt has only grown in skill over the years, while Depp has been pretty consistently bad after Sweeney Todd.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on May 20, 2021 19:49:09 GMT
No brainer, Depp. From '90 to '09 - He was one of the best going, he could play anything and could play your role better or a lot more interestingly than you, that includes Pitt. He was a daring actor too whose dares always seemed to work bc his creative instincts were so exciting and unpredictable but benefitted the movies. He puts to shame all the bland young crop of actors who seem indifferent from each other, unwilling or unable to add character to their characters. I think there's a reason Pacino and Brando took to him so much. It's amazing to compare some of his roles and streaks - he did Blow, From Hell, Finding Neverland, Pirates of the Caribbean, Secret Window, The Libertine within three or so years, often back-to-back. And that's after his 90s peak. Even recently, has he slipped? Sure, but not totally. He's hilarious in Dark Shadows and as Trump in Art of the Deal... and pretty damn good in Black Mass and his ominous bit in Barbarians. Pitt has some good perfs and charm, but short-supply talent. I'm going with the guy who was eaten by the bed in Elm Street.
|
|
flasuss
Badass
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 1,615
|
Post by flasuss on May 20, 2021 23:33:54 GMT
When Depp was an actor, I might have picked him...
|
|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on May 21, 2021 8:09:15 GMT
Overall I'd have to side with Pitt.
Until the mid to late 2000s Depp was one of the more interesting actors out there. He was also quite a talented actor too, more interesting than talented though. He just went off the boil after that, and has been cooling in my interest and respect ever since.
Pitt has always been a favourite of mine. He was never as exciting an actor as Depp, but over the course of the last 30s years or so, he has dipped his feet into excellence on quite a few occasions, and the only time I can ever remember thinking he was actively bad was in Friends...although I might be blanking on something else.
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on May 21, 2021 8:53:15 GMT
Brad Pitt
|
|
|
Post by HELENA MARIA on May 21, 2021 10:36:12 GMT
These days, Pitt. For life, Depp.
This🎯
|
|
|
Post by franklin on May 21, 2021 10:57:00 GMT
Before 2010: Depp After 2010: Pitt
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 21, 2021 11:56:30 GMT
Pitt has a far better catalogue of films and, by virtue of that, a far better array of performances. I think Depp is generally capable of more, but he clearly doesn't give too much of a fuck and hasn't for so long.
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on May 21, 2021 15:03:23 GMT
Pitt has a far better catalogue of films and, by virtue of that, a far better array of performances. I think Depp is generally capable of more, but he clearly doesn't give too much of a fuck and hasn't for so long. Well said. Depp has been slacking for quite some time now. IMO Depp's collaborations with Tim Burton are insanely overrated and uninspired . Burton makes Depp wear a ton of white make up and tells him to just act weird. Sorry not sorry , thats just not that impressive imo. I will say I did like Depp in Public Enemies quite a bit but that performance does not come close to Pitt's scary good performance as Jesse James.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 21, 2021 15:14:24 GMT
Pitt has a far better catalogue of films and, by virtue of that, a far better array of performances. I think Depp is generally capable of more, but he clearly doesn't give too much of a fuck and hasn't for so long. Well said. Depp has been slacking for quite some time now. IMO Depp's collaborations with Tim Burton are insanely overrated and uninspired . Burton makes Depp wear a ton of white make up and tells him to just act weird. Sorry not sorry , thats just not that impressive imo. I will say I did like Depp in Public Enemies quite a bit but that performance does not come close to Pitt's scary good performance as Jesse James. I don't much care for Depp's Dillinger, but I think his Whitey Bulger in Black Mass was terrifying and menacing in a way that I don't think Pitt can really portray convincingly.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 21, 2021 16:34:57 GMT
Well said. Depp has been slacking for quite some time now. IMO Depp's collaborations with Tim Burton are insanely overrated and uninspired . Burton makes Depp wear a ton of white make up and tells him to just act weird. Sorry not sorry , thats just not that impressive imo. I will say I did like Depp in Public Enemies quite a bit but that performance does not come close to Pitt's scary good performance as Jesse James. I don't much care for Depp's Dillinger, but I think his Whitey Bulger in Black Mass was terrifying and menacing in a way that I don't think Pitt can really portray convincingly. I don't think Depp was particularly good in Black Mass. He fell into his usual patterns and made Bulger a cartoon grotesque. It actually felt like Depp was in a different movie from everyone else (like Edgerton, who gave a completely naturalistic performance). His Bulger was so over-the-top evil, that I can't believe anyone could be in the same room as him for more than 5 minutes. He doesn't feel believable as a charasmatic crime boss and leader of men. He comes of as a paedophile or a flasher. I don't know who I'd cast as Bulger, but after seeing his performance, I wish it was anyone but Depp. Didn't buy him for a second. You'll certainly disagree, but I think Matt Damon would have bee a faaaar better Bulger.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on May 21, 2021 18:17:39 GMT
I don't much care for Depp's Dillinger, but I think his Whitey Bulger in Black Mass was terrifying and menacing in a way that I don't think Pitt can really portray convincingly. I don't think Depp was particularly good in Black Mass. He fell into his usual patterns and made Bulger a cartoon grotesque. It actually felt like Depp was in a different movie from everyone else (like Edgerton, who gave a completely naturalistic performance). His Bulger was so over-the-top evil, that I can't believe anyone could be in the same room as him for more than 5 minutes. He doesn't feel believable as a charasmatic crime boss and leader of men. He comes of as a paedophile or a flasher. I don't know who I'd cast as Bulger, but after seeing his performance, I wish it was anyone but Depp. Didn't buy him for a second. You'll certainly disagree, but I think Matt Damon would have bee a faaaar better Bulger. I enjoyed aspects of Black Mass, but yes Depp was kinda miscast as Bulger, who wasn't even as crazy looking as the film made him out to be. His current day mannerisms also didn't match with the real life killer. Honestly I like the suggestion of Damon playing the role, he wouldn't have even needed to put on a silly voice or anything, and it could have been a good "casting against type" role.
|
|
rhodoraonline
Full Member
Your Generosity Hides Something Dirtier and Meaner
Posts: 997
Likes: 496
|
Post by rhodoraonline on May 21, 2021 19:53:05 GMT
I like Pitt enough as a movie star, though he's clearly not an 'actorly' actor, but on the other hand, Depp failed to impress me as much as I expected based on my early interest in him and the later hype I encountered over him, so I'll chose Pitt, I guess I like his films more. I did not vote because I think they're both even (for different reasons though).
|
|