|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 11:26:34 GMT
Of course, the ideal is never to play your "type" but that becomes very difficult in American movies - usually the bigger you are the more you are fitted to your screen persona - which is fine to me - but who is someone that you "think" could do do something they really never do (it seems) or haven't pulled off...........or isn't in their "strength" anyway Some obvious ones for me: Hanks, playing a "villain". At his age it may be a "one and done" role - like the best example in movies - Fonda in OUATITW .............maybe it's Elvis - we'll see? Washington - playing in a comedy- a comic role in a big film would have him much closer to the American GOATs imo - than he is atm - every American actor I rank ahead of him as an "all timer" /GOAT has pulled off comedy clearly more than him and is comparable or better in drama - and that's even with TToM. Hopkins - see Washington .............although Hopkins is older so he doesn't need it because he isn't as "active" it feels now after his 2nd win - his legacy is pretty locked as is (and it's major) .....but a comedy success would really get Hopkins a bit closer to Olivier / DDL ( also lacks comedy btw) / Finney as a UK level top 3 for me - all of whom I rank ahead of him - and that's even with The Father Bale - No more body changing roles (?) - this may be the case already? Age may have done this for him? Chalamet - A role where he seems his actual age - he's 26 - and not noticeably young. May be a bit unfair.......
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on Feb 20, 2022 11:54:19 GMT
Definitely Hanks as a villain for me. I know Tarantino had an older actor in mind for Calvin Candie and I think that Hanks would have been an interesting choice.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 13:38:00 GMT
Definitely Hanks as a villain for me. I know Tarantino had an older actor in mind for Calvin Candie and I think that Hanks would have been an interesting choice.^ This role is exactly what I mean and I always say it's one of the most important for a major actor in American film history - even though I don't like the movie (the 3rd act tanks it). This role was a comic villain - it's kills 2 birds with 1 stone - prior to this I said DiCap needed to be funny - I used to criticize this as a weakness for him prior - and not only is he (inappropriately) funny here, he's villainous .........it's very rare for a big actor - a star actor - to get both of those...........this role not only showed me he could be funny but hinted at much darker things and layering in a role too - and he says the N-word plenty too, etc.. This was a masterstroke of actor and role - and he wasn't nominated for it - for all the dumbasses who count Oscar nominations like they "mean" something. DiCaprio then was funny mulitiple times after this ..........and his performances became more shaded too .........and he did it at the age that we didn't really notice his shift - it seemed "seamless" - not the way it would for Hanks (or Hopkins or Washington). Side note: There's a question I always ask: what roles would you like to see a "younger Brando" do in recent films? Without question........for me............ it's Calvin Candie .....
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on Feb 20, 2022 13:51:49 GMT
Definitely Hanks as a villain for me. I know Tarantino had an older actor in mind for Calvin Candie and I think that Hanks would have been an interesting choice.^ This role is exactly what I mean and I always say it's one of the most important for a major actor in American film history - even though I don't like the movie (the 3rd act tanks it). This role was a comic villain - it's kills 2 birds with 1 stone - prior to this I said DiCap needed to be funny - I used to criticize this as a weakness for him prior - and not only is he (inappropriately) funny here, he's villainous .........it's very rare for a big actor - a star actor - to get both of those...........this role not only showed me he could be funny but hinted at much darker things and layering in a role too - and he says the N-word plenty too, etc.. This was a masterstroke of actor and role - and he wasn't nominated for it - for all the dumbasses who count Oscar nominations like they "mean" something. DiCaprio then was funny mulitiple times after this ..........and his performances became more shaded too .........and he did it at the age that we didn't really notice his shift - it seemed "seamless" - not the way it would for Hanks (or Hopkins or Washington). Side note: There's a question I always ask: what roles would you like to see a "younger Brando" do in recent films? Without question........for me............ it's Calvin Candie ..... Agreed and props to Leo for taking on a role like this at the height of his star power when most would probably avoid it. I would like to see a younger Brando have a go Cumberbatch's role in TPOTD but I'm more intrigued by a young Paul Newman taking a crack at this role.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 14:13:10 GMT
^ This role is exactly what I mean and I always say it's one of the most important for a major actor in American film history - even though I don't like the movie (the 3rd act tanks it). This role was a comic villain - it's kills 2 birds with 1 stone - prior to this I said DiCap needed to be funny - I used to criticize this as a weakness for him prior - and not only is he (inappropriately) funny here, he's villainous .........it's very rare for a big actor - a star actor - to get both of those...........this role not only showed me he could be funny but hinted at much darker things and layering in a role too - and he says the N-word plenty too, etc.. This was a masterstroke of actor and role - and he wasn't nominated for it - for all the dumbasses who count Oscar nominations like they "mean" something. DiCaprio then was funny mulitiple times after this ..........and his performances became more shaded too .........and he did it at the age that we didn't really notice his shift - it seemed "seamless" - not the way it would for Hanks (or Hopkins or Washington). Side note: There's a question I always ask: what roles would you like to see a "younger Brando" do in recent films? Without question........for me............ it's Calvin Candie ..... Agreed and props to Leo for taking on a role like this at the height of his star power when most would probably avoid it. I would like to see a younger Brando have a go Cumberbatch's role in TPOTD but I'm more intrigued by a young Paul Newman taking a crack at this role.I have thought of this too actually - I loved Cumby's performance - really loved it - and what's interesting of course is unlike Newman and Brando he doesn't have the "virility" component of either in his screen persona - if anything you (maybe) don't buy him "acting straight" or "acting masculine" (whatever) .........but he has the "sensitivity" part of the character when he assumed the role - like what Newman had to hint at in Cat On A Hot Tin Roof and Brando more than hinted at in Reflections In A Golden Eye. They are inverses of each other. That's a great compliment to how awesome Cumby's performance is imo and the role too - ie we think of American iconic masculine actors "not like him" rather than other pasty skinned British intellectuals ........Cumby's another guy who's lucky he got that role which is great because it's so vague and elliptical............. when usually great roles are that way because they're NOT vague at all.........
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,595
|
Post by Nikan on Feb 20, 2022 15:13:29 GMT
Definitely Hanks as a villain for me. I know Tarantino had an older actor in mind for Calvin Candie and I think that Hanks would have been an interesting choice.^ This was a masterstroke of actor and role - and he wasn't nominated for it - for all the dumbasses who count Oscar nominations like they "mean" something. DiCaprio then was funny mulitiple times after this ..........and his performances became more shaded too .........and he did it at the age that we didn't really notice his shift - it seemed "seamless" - not the way it would for Hanks (or Hopkins or Washington). What do you think about his Wolf of Wall Street performance? how does that movie fare with you compared to other Marty joints? (I know you don't like Goodfellas much)
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 20, 2022 15:32:24 GMT
While it'd be fun to see Washington do more Comedy, he doesn't need to prove he can, since he has a very successful comedy notch under his belt (as a lead actor no less). Washington is one of the few so-called GOAT candidates that has a Christmas Classic Romantic Comedy on rotation every year in The Preacher's Wife. The man played a role first taken by the most acclaimed Romantic Comedy leading man of all-time in Cary Grant, got reviews positively comparing his performance to Grant, and made a film that remains popular 25 years after it was made. For Denzel, The Preacher's Wife is a legacy film. Still plays today and has an audience and is probably a bigger deal than the Grant original now. That's fucking huge. Taking on the Mount Rushmore of Romantic Comedy leads and actually remaking a film of his that becomes arguably more popular. And have it actually be a debate as to who is better in the role ( Washington or Grant?). Washington clearly could have easily been one of the most successful Romantic Comedy leads of his era if he was interested in going down that path. But I guess he proved his point and was one and done as a rom-com guy Interestingly enough, both the AFI (American Film Institute) and the BFI (British Film Institute) have cited The Preacher's Wife among Washington's key films and examples of his extraordinary range. AFI cited it as one of the top 12 Holiday classic movies in 2021 and BFI listed it as one of his 10 essential films in 2017 www2.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/lists/denzel-washington-10-essential-filmsHe's also done action successful action comedies like 2 Guns and Shakespearan Comedy like Much Ado About Nothing. Hid first film Carbon Copy was a Comedy and he was probably the best thing about it.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 15:57:40 GMT
^ This was a masterstroke of actor and role - and he wasn't nominated for it - for all the dumbasses who count Oscar nominations like they "mean" something. DiCaprio then was funny mulitiple times after this ..........and his performances became more shaded too .........and he did it at the age that we didn't really notice his shift - it seemed "seamless" - not the way it would for Hanks (or Hopkins or Washington). What do you think about his Wolf of Wall Street performance? how does that movie fare with you compared to other Marty joints? (I know you don't like Goodfellas much) Well, I do like Goodfellas a lot - I just don't consider it as great as some do - I usually rate it at 8.5 or so but I don't think it was the best of 1990 (The Grifters, ftw!) or an "all time" great film. I don't think it has much depth (at all) or compares (at all) to The Godfather I and II. I'll take The Irishman over Goodfellas too tbh......but it's wildly entertaining...... I think his WoWS performance was a real "shut up his critics" level performance and among the best of decade: Not only does he dominate it, it's dialog heavy, he has to center it and carry it, it's long, he's funny again but now he suddenly was physically funny - he had a physical comedy side - it's quite a shock if you look at it when he did it and how well he did it......and what he had done to date. Also, we didn't really have an actor show a "physical comedic" side much when he did that either.........not since........Jim Carrey (?) - DiCap really lucked out in his comedies and if course he delivered on them - it couldn't have come at a better time for him........and again the comic side increased his overall acting which is what I mean in this thread - prior to those you could say he was a "surface line reader" - ie he played the text very well but maybe didn't deepen the text much........but starting w/ Django he went into a different gear in how he played text - he also started to suggest a backstory in his characters too. He wasn't "just" funny.......
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 16:23:58 GMT
Washington's comedies are lesser than the other GOATs though - they just obviously are - and that's the level I'm holding him at - no Golden Globe nod, Oscar nod, or a huge box office (Meet The Parents level) hit for a comedy.There are a handful of "great Oscar nodded a lot" actors who are missing this: Hopkins/Burton/Washington/Clift/Duvall to some extent DDL and Brando.....the last two can be argued for it more though than the other 5. In the case of Clift he never tried comedy on film.....Duvall is in M*A*S*H which is a GREAT comedy - certainly far moreso than Washington's - but he himself is not particularly funny in it etc. It's more "like that" to me......he's closer to Duvall...... Side Note: A really good example of an actor getting a comedic role just when he really needed it imo is Ed Norton - in Birdman - where he himself seemed like the character he was playing - a rather STFU dick-ish full of himself actor. Like Ed Norton isn't known for comedy but getting THAT comedy helped him a whole lot to cross that off his list........GG nod, Oscar nod, BAFTA nod, in a BP winner.......etc.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Feb 20, 2022 18:41:08 GMT
I have said before that Matt Damon needs to play more villains and jerks. He does it so well when he tries because he still has that outward "nice" veneer and that combined with his well known past roles a nice guys and heroes makes it very off putting. We've seen this with his recent roles in Last Duel, Interstellar, Suburbicon (where I think he is good despite the movie's other issues) all the way back to Talented Mr. Ripley.
And yes, I still don't think I'd like him, but Chalamet needs to move past the twink thing and play adults.
|
|
flasuss
Badass
Posts: 1,830
Likes: 1,615
|
Post by flasuss on Feb 20, 2022 18:53:50 GMT
If comedy counts, Tom Hanks played a villain in Ladykillers.
Also, some of the actors mentioned may not do a lot of comedy, but doesn't mean they aren't capable of being funny or outright hilarious in dramatic roles when called for it.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Feb 20, 2022 18:57:15 GMT
Gosling - something risky or a character piece or a play adaptation or something nasty? Wolfman might cross some of these. The Gray Man franchise and Barbie...? I'm not so sure.
Pacino - there's no role I don't wanna see him play but I'd also like a small, domestic drama between the starry, showy roles.... Ever since Scorsese mentioned he wanted to adapt Marilynne Robinson's Home, I've casted Pacino as the retired minister who's become just an old man in a room (ok, The New Yorker called the character "a chastened Lear" but that's coincidence!) and Joaquin as his prodigal son. Could be Bergmanesque or like Dreyer.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 19:31:55 GMT
If comedy counts, Tom Hanks played a villain in Ladykillers. Also, some of the actors mentioned may not do a lot of comedy, but doesn't mean they aren't capable of being funny or outright hilarious in dramatic roles when called for it. ^ This is all true, yes - but Hanks didn't make you feel menace in The Ladykillers so it isn't exactly the same either as what I (or most audiences I suspect) would want from him too - as a "villain". He's a pretty "likable" / safe villain after all.......... That is true about their capabilities too (in bold above) - but it is quite different to pull off "comedy" rather than to be funny in a drama too. Again, not that they can't do it - great actors can do some of everything - it's just that relatively they've done it relatively less .........I think it's a bit of a cop out to say "well they could do it - Hopkins is creepy funny in Silence of the Lambs!" - you always just want to judge them on the work they've actually done. They "can" be funny ......... but really they haven't been funny in comedies - or gotten acclaim at least for it - for the level they're held at anyway. Side note: What about the reverse - who's a funny actor you want to see pull off a drama like Melissa McCarthy did?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 20, 2022 20:07:07 GMT
Gosling - something risky or a character piece or a play adaptation or something nasty? Wolfman might cross some of these. The Gray Man franchise and Barbie...? I'm not so sure. I always talk about how great that scene is in Blue Valentine - mostly due to Williams who steals it - on the bus where she tells the "offensive" joke but Gosling is so unaffected here and naturally - almost eerily - charming he always lends himself to something complex - like an inward puppydog that could curdle into something else......... He's got a performance in him that is neither the hero of the piece or the obvious villain (like The Believer) - I thought of him for that movie film The Trap which is long dead I guess - I'd love to have seen him play Slim instead of Del Toro......I'd love to see him play something conflicting or counter to what we think is happening........the most interesting eyes on an American male actor in a long time...... In The Trap, written by Korine, Rico (Elba) is at the top of his career and about to enjoy a triumphant night at the Grammy Awards when Slim (Del Toro) is released from prison after 14 years. Slim is determined to exact revenge after learning that Rico not only achieved fame and fortune but also married his girlfriend and raised Slim’s son as his own. Slim’s plot includes recruiting a crew of Uzi-wielding surfers led by Max (Pattinson), as well as enlisting the help of Rico’s cocaine-happy manager (Franco). Pacino will play Slim’s parole officer.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 21, 2022 8:39:00 GMT
Stll no actresses mentioned .........except when I asked what actresses should try to pull what I said for Hopkins / Washington - in reverse - like Melissa McCarthy (ie a comedic one who also pulled off a drama) .......way to fight the patriarchy MAR ........so I'll name a personal all time favorite, one of the most influential actresses in how she once balanced comedy and drama to brilliant effect.........but who hasn't pushed herself in a dramatic part in a long time it seems to me....... The great Diane Keaton could use to do something dramatic - she's not struggled to find that balance her whole career like the men I mentioned earlier in the thread - on the contrary she balanced both to an all-timer degree ....... but she could use a drama to remind people what she was these days. I'd love to see it personally.......she's 76.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 22, 2022 1:01:07 GMT
Saoirse Ronan - Been a fan of hers since 2007, but I've felt lately she's been a less daring performer than in her early days. I thought her very good in Little Women, but it was honestly the first time since Atonement/I Could Never Be Your Woman that I found her truly impressive. I think she should do a very manic role in a wild comedy, like something Vince Vaughn would have done in the mid 00s.
Leo - I'm curious to see him tackle another strong-accented role, like an uppercrust English barrister in a period piece courtroom drama surrounded by cream of the crop Brit and Irish talent like Andrea Riseborough, Kate Winslet, Ruth Negga, etc.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,706
Likes: 2,129
|
Post by cherry68 on Feb 22, 2022 17:33:14 GMT
pacinoyes Actually Norton has played many comedic roles... Everyone says I love you Keeping the faith (he directed too) Death to Smoochy Moonrise Kingdom The grand Budapest hotel, all before Birdman.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 22, 2022 17:38:37 GMT
pacinoyes Actually Norton has played many comedic roles... Everyone says I love you Keeping the faith (he directed too) Death to Smoochy Moonrise Kingdom The grand Budapest hotel, all before Birdman. Didn't you know? Comedy doesn't count for an actor unless you've recieved a Golden Globe nomination for it, or it's made at least 250 million dollars at the Box Office ( yes, someone on this board actually says this nonsense with a straight face). None of Norton's other comedies showed any evidence of his a ability to act in a comedy, because the Golden Globes didn't give his performances their seal of approval and they didn't make a billion dollars.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 22, 2022 19:08:19 GMT
pacinoyes Actually Norton has played many comedic roles... Everyone says I love you Keeping the faith (he directed too) Death to Smoochy Moonrise Kingdom The grand Budapest hotel,
all before Birdman. Yes, I am a big fan of some of that work too ......and I also LOVE his guest stint on Modern Family where he plays a "member" of the music Spandau Ballet (and has an all timer great line in it "You're no a FAN-dau" ) with a Britsih accent too btw. But Birdman really tapped in to what people said about him irl about being a "difficult to deal with actor".........and of course he got all the praise for it that actor "at his high level" usually gets when they nail it - a big hit, a GG nod, a Bafta nod, an Oscar nod - in his case he got it ALL.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 22, 2022 19:11:38 GMT
pacinoyes Actually Norton has played many comedic roles... Everyone says I love you Keeping the faith (he directed too) Death to Smoochy Moonrise Kingdom The grand Budapest hotel, all before Birdman. Didn't you know? Comedy doesn't count for an actor unless you've recieved a Golden Globe nomination for it, or it's made at least 250 million dollars at the Box Office ( yes, someone on this board actually says this nonsense with a straight face). None of Norton's other comedies showed any evidence of his a ability to act in a comedy, because the Golden Globes didn't give his performances their seal of approval and they didn't make a billion dollars.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 22, 2022 19:21:57 GMT
Didn't you know? Comedy doesn't count for an actor unless you've recieved a Golden Globe nomination for it, or it's made at least 250 million dollars at the Box Office ( yes, someone on this board actually says this nonsense with a straight face). None of Norton's other comedies showed any evidence of his a ability to act in a comedy, because the Golden Globes didn't give his performances their seal of approval and they didn't make a billion dollars. But we know what really lives rent free in your head :
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 22, 2022 19:51:40 GMT
Saoirse Ronan - Been a fan of hers since 2007, but I've felt lately she's been a less daring performer than in her early days. I thought her very good in Little Women, but it was honestly the first time since Atonement/I Could Never Be Your Woman that I found her truly impressive. I think she should do a very manic role in a wild comedy, like something Vince Vaughn would have done in the mid 00s. ^ I love anything with her going against type - not because - it's "obvious" she should go against type - that's not it - but rather what actress under 30 so clearly has things "known" about her like she does who COULD go against type? Not just silly things (the actress whose name is pronounced weird!) but an actress who already evokes several other actresses - Winslet, maybe Blanchett etc., already tagged as a "great" actress - not a "good" actress but already stamped with that tag of great........her fans worship her - not just "like her" - it goes beyond that ......................already perceived as an iconic and classy presence........... I would love to see her in whatever the female version of Bad Santa is - like just something totally against how she's perceived
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Feb 22, 2022 21:36:09 GMT
DiCaprio playing Hamlet or a President, for example the Roosevelt biopic he seems to have planned.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 22, 2022 22:34:07 GMT
DiCaprio playing Hamlet or a President, for example the Roosevelt biopic he seems to have planned. Well he's fascinating for a bunch of reasons - first of all he doesn't need a comedy - he's mastered that by the criteria that most of the "great" level actors have (exluding Washington / Hopkins/ Duvall and the others that I mentioned who are missing it) - GG, or BAFTA, or Oscar nods, etc - or "big" comedic hit - and he doesn't need a role in most of the smaller genres or types in drama either (Romance or an Ensemble piece etc.)......but the big thing with him may actually be if he wins the BA Oscar this year. That changes a lot....... I say that because if he wins - and he's maybe the favorite sight unseen - he may be likely to try something really weird because he then becomes a potential 3 time BA winner - not just a 3 time winner (there will be a lot of those - but there will not be a lot of 3 time BA winners male besides DDL (maybe ....none?))........down the road. Some roles he lost the window for - like Hamlet - but if he wins BA next year those "biopic" roles become like "his Lincoln".......Roosevelt ..........Jim Jones.....etc. I'd also like to see him do a play on film. He doesn't have to do stage work - Nicholson didn't, Phoenix doesn't - that's fine - and he's done Shakespeare on film..................... but there are a lot of great stage roles that haven't been adapted for the movies............and they are just sitting there when he gets older and can be done with quick adaptations too....... He'd be great in David Mamet's Speed the Plow - which has never been done on film........ Ron Silver, Madonna, Joe Mantegna in the original Broadway version. DiCap could kill EITHER male role........and he could "own" the role........
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 23, 2022 18:19:41 GMT
How about Tom Hardy? I don't want to turn this into a "who needs to do a comedy" thread but maybe at least lighten up a little for a bit? On the other hand Hardy may have been great in TPoTD (if Cumby didn't play it).......or maybe not - maybe it would have revealed limitations......but that's an example of being typecast in that you think of him for a role even if you think he needs to get away from that role.
|
|