|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Aug 5, 2022 3:51:42 GMT
Bale has a good filmography, it's just very bipolar. His taste is wonky, so it seems like he just chooses shit at random. It's definitely not as good as Leo's though. Leo doesn't do movies like The Promise or Flowers of War. You can't omit that stuff. Well like Mattsby said, it depends on how much you can forgive bad movies if there's a lot of standout, quality work. For me, bad work doesn't blemish a filmography if there's already enough good stuff there. I don't really care that Leo doesn't do stuff like The Promise or Flowers of War because Bale still has more movies that I like overall.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Aug 5, 2022 4:57:53 GMT
Bale has a good filmography, it's just very bipolar. His taste is wonky, so it seems like he just chooses shit at random. It's definitely not as good as Leo's though. Leo doesn't do movies like The Promise or Flowers of War. You can't omit that stuff. Well like Mattsby said, it depends on how much you can forgive bad movies if there's a lot of standout, quality work. For me, bad work doesn't blemish a filmography if there's already enough good stuff there. I don't really care that Leo doesn't do stuff like The Promise or Flowers of War because Bale still has more movies that I like overall.Which is your prerogative, but I don't quite agree. Bale to me has fewer top tier films (albeit The New World and TDK were triumphs), fewer mid-range achievements, and way more crap. Part of why some people don't understand Leo's mystique is because they don't understand the idea of trying to carve out a career with single-minded purposefulness. Why should I care about an actor if he or she doesn't care? Why would I spend my money? Pay close attention to their career? Look at Jake Gyllenhaal. He's been in a number of very good movies, but lately? Crap after crap after crap. How much can a Zodiac hold you over? Generation Z can't even remember when Jake was consistently in good movies. It's like a fever dream.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Aug 5, 2022 13:09:29 GMT
Well like Mattsby said, it depends on how much you can forgive bad movies if there's a lot of standout, quality work. For me, bad work doesn't blemish a filmography if there's already enough good stuff there. I don't really care that Leo doesn't do stuff like The Promise or Flowers of War because Bale still has more movies that I like overall.Which is your prerogative, but I don't quite agree. Bale to me has fewer top tier films (albeit The New World and TDK were triumphs), fewer mid-range achievements, and way more crap. Part of why some people don't understand Leo's mystique is because they don't understand the idea of trying to carve out a career with single-minded purposefulness. Why should I care about an actor if he or she doesn't care? Why would I spend my money? Pay close attention to their career? Look at Jake Gyllenhaal. He's been in a number of very good movies, but lately? Crap after crap after crap. How much can a Zodiac hold you over? Generation Z can't even remember when Jake was consistently in good movies. It's like a fever dream. Gen Z also know DiCaprio more so as the old dude that only dates young models and dumps them once they turn 25. Most ppl don’t care about actors overall filmography’s, just if they like them in the movies they see (and like those movies).
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Aug 5, 2022 16:52:11 GMT
Bale has a good filmography, it's just very bipolar. His taste is wonky, so it seems like he just chooses shit at random. It's definitely not as good as Leo's though. Leo doesn't do movies like The Promise or Flowers of War. You can't omit that stuff. I agree I prefer Bale in little indie co-productions with Europe that nowadays Hollywood blockbusters.- My favorites are Amlet and Metrloand and Equilibrium, movies that none have seen or remember it.- And in fact they had mixed to bad reviews from critics. But define what a twenty something actor born in the 70s was capable.- Leonardo Di Caprio as a character actor endend with his portray of Poet Rimbaud. After it there were all this expesive movies around his persona. But despite some are great films, and his performance are great. I miss rebellious young Di Caprio.- I love despite several turkeys Bale filmography, specially when we compared him to Ben Affleck, and even more with Robert Sean Leonard, Billy Zane, C. Thomas Howell, Tom Berenger, Peter Coyote, Mickey Roucke or Dennis Hopper.- Several of them ended doing Z movies directed for DVD.-
|
|
flasuss
Badass
Posts: 1,830
Likes: 1,615
|
Post by flasuss on Aug 5, 2022 18:00:02 GMT
Bale has more stinkers in his resume, but he also makes much more movies and takes way more risks than Di Caprio.
While to be honest, I (and most people) would take Di Caprio's approach to work if I could- only work with big names in big projects that are virtually risk free and make a lot of money from it, spend the rest of my time sleeping with gorgeous women less than half my age- I respect Bale's much more.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Aug 5, 2022 20:16:44 GMT
You could argue Ralph Fiennes is someone whose talent doesn’t really match his career.
He’s got one classic BP winner where he gives an all-timer supporting performance, but the other BP winner he stars in is not as well-regarded by a lot of people (and is the butt of a joke on Seinfeld), and his role in The Hurt Locker is so small, you don’t really think of him when you talk about that movie.
He’s got a couple beloved, acclaimed comedies under his belt (In Bruges, Grand Budapest), some other respectable stuff like Quiz Show and Cronenberg’s Spider, but not much other standout films aside from those.
A couple big franchises like Harry Potter (a memorable, important role in a big ensemble) and Bond where he’s not really what you remember about those films. You’d think he’d have more quality work for someone of his caliber.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 27, 2022 23:09:56 GMT
Chris Walken is one also because he doesn't or hasn't exercised a personal editing function in accepting roles - he may be the most talented American actor with a filmography that doesn't fully reflect that talent ...though he's in classics anyway ....Annie Hall, Deer Hunter, Pulp Fiction, but probably not what he could have done if he was more discerning..... Christopher Walken — who stars as Captain Hook Thursday on NBC — admits that he hardly ever turns down a job. “I can't think of anything I turned down,” the actor told his friend Chuck Pfeifer in an interview for Quest magazine. Dec 3, 2014
|
|
|
Post by TylerDeneuve on Dec 14, 2023 15:50:23 GMT
What about the likes of Liv Ullmann, Gong Li, Monica Vitti, and Gena Rowlands, whose best work has typically been with only one director (their real life romantic partner, at that)? Do you think that limits them?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 14, 2023 16:10:10 GMT
What about the likes of Liv Ullmann, Gong Li, Monica Vitti, and Gena Rowlands, whose best work has typically been with only one director (their real life romantic partner, at that)? Do you think that limits them? I think filmography is a metric it is not the sole metric........... So if I'm ranking an actor it plays a part in it.......I certainly do not think it limits Ullman who is in several of the greatest films of all-time in world cinema. To a deeper extent than Li. Vitti and much more than Rowlands imo......... I think Ullman however is hurt rather by not being particularly funny............also a metric - which this board blows off too much - but that's also not the sole metric......... Ullman / Bergman is a lot like De Niro / Scorsese to me......not exactly but to a large degree.......all great actresses ^ it's merely an argument of how great for each of us.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Dec 14, 2023 16:19:56 GMT
What about the likes of Liv Ullmann, Gong Li, Monica Vitti, and Gena Rowlands, whose best work has typically been with only one director (their real life romantic partner, at that)? Do you think that limits them? It's often hard to judge actresses in this metric because there's so often a different playing field for them as opposed to their male counterparts, due to the sorts of roles they are often tasked with playing, they have to fight for longevity in the business in the youth-centric industry, and there usually does require the development of a repeated creative partnership out of pure necessity. All are great talents but if Cassavetes wasn't writing those roles with Rowlands in mind, or if Ullmann didn't have Bergman, or Vitti Antonioni, it's just as likely that they would be far more obscure regardless of their innate talent. On the one hand, I find DiCaprio to be a crutch for Scorsese because he often casts Leo in roles he's completely unsuited for, but DiCaprio is guaranteed at the box office so that partnership continues (and while I am sure they both get along like a house on fire, it's ridiculous to ignore that very real fact). But for actresses who don't usually get to enjoy that level of creative freedom and selectivity, it kind of comes down to taking what they are able to get. With that said, a repeated partnership should always try to explore new facets of an actor's talents, and build the project around them, instead of forcing them into something they might not be right for.
|
|
|
Post by paulgallo on Dec 14, 2023 21:26:44 GMT
Going by Larrain's track record I can see Angelina Jolie become a three time Oscar nominee soon, and she's a winner at that, but her filmography is just awful. Made even more baffling by the fact that she was probably the biggest female star for more than a decade and could have grabbed every role she wanted in that time.
|
|