|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 9, 2018 3:38:11 GMT
I don't think anyone can question Day-Lewis ability play any sort of dramatic role. The only thing one might question is his ability to elevate poor or mediocre material. His selectivity means he's never been tested in that way. I'm sure DDL would absolutely crush it as a contemporary cop in some Michael Mann (in his better days) or Scorsese magnum opus. But could he wring much out of a lesser director and a ropey script? We'll never know. But that's partially why I think Washington has a slight edge in respect among actors over Day-Lewis. Washington crushes it as well under optimal conditions (great script, great director ect), but also delivers in the trenches when the service ain't so great. Day-Lewis is more of a luxury item by comparison. Daniel Day-Lewis isn't a utility infielder. You don't simply call him to fill space. And his reputation is such that the only people that would approach him are those who know that a.) the project is worthwhile, b.) that it's not the sort of everyday role that any actor can play, and c.) that they can manage to work alongside his method routine. Most directors do not have the time or wherewithal for that, and there is an obvious intimidation factor that goes along with it. Now, the directors who have worked with him (PTA, Spielberg, Scorsese) have had nothing but positive things to say about Day-Lewis when it comes to being a collaborator; he isn't as "extreme" as the parodic Kirk Lazarus of Tropic Thunder or the "wanna-be" copycats would have us believe. I don't think that people can hold Day-Lewis's selectivity against him when judging him against the other greats. It's just one metric that can't necessarily be quantified (although I would argue that Day-Lewis elevated the holy hell out of a scattershot script in Gangs of New York, a film that was also salvaged by Scorsese's best direction, a fantastic supporting ensemble, and the best art direction/costumes of any movie). I get what you are saying, but DDL created that reputation for himself. It's mostly benefitted him in terms of esteem (which was probably the point), but it's created those few holes that can be used to argue against him. It's a trade-off I guess he's happy with. But I do wonder if even Day-Lewis views Washington's career, with less self imposed limitations and restrictions, with a bit of envy. DDL was magnificent in Gangs Of New York, but I don't think he elevated something inherently weak or average. That character was massively strong on the page. Scorsese's direction was up to his usual standard. There wasn't much wrong with the script either (which got nominated by both the Oscars and the Writers Guild). It was very evocative. Gangs Of New York fell short on the miscasting of two of the other leads (Dicaprio and Cameron Diaz). Neither were remotely credible in their roles, and since so much of the film followed their budding romance and "oy beggorah" oirish accents, it damaged what should have been a great movie as a whole. Their performances were incredibly poor and amateurish compared to the rest of the cast. Shocking how much damage miscasting two actors can cause, but GONY is a prime example of a great project in every other aspect being harmed by such miscasting. Should easily have been a classic. If Scorsese had cast Colin Farrell as Amsterdam and maybe a lesser known (but more skilled) Irish or British actress in the Diaz role, the film might have been special. But I guess Marty could only get that budget with Leo and Cameron.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 9, 2018 4:44:00 GMT
I get what you are saying, but DDL created that reputation for himself. It's mostly benefitted him in terms of esteem (which was probably the point), but it's created those few holes that can be used to argue against him. It's a trade-off I guess he's happy with. But I do wonder if even Day-Lewis views Washington's career, with less self imposed limitations and restrictions, with a bit of envy. I'm sure Day-Lewis is very happy with the way his career has gone. He probably could secure work with just about anyone in the world if he wanted to. Tarantino is the only one to actively turn him away, and that was before the "DDL legend" really became what it is today. I'm sure that if he wanted a Washington-esque career, where he was taking on blockbusters as well as doing his typical fare, he could probably have done that. Last of the Mohicans proved that he would've been remarkably adept at carrying such a film, even if it is more of a "prestige" movie than most of what Washington does. The difference is that Washington commands a consistent box-office, whereas Day-Lewis's most lucrative movie was a Spielberg film about a beloved American icon. But then that is also chalked up to the sort of movies he makes. If Day-Lewis were doing more movies like Last of the Mohicans instead of going into semi-retirement and taking huge sabbaticals, he might've enjoyed a promising career on the level of what Washington did, and might have even prevented other actors of his generation like Russell Crowe from really making landfall here. I do imagine that Day-Lewis probably admires the hell out of Washington, but he probably also recognizes that what Washington has accomplished isn't necessarily what he himself would want. Gangs of New York's primary issue isn't really DiCaprio or Diaz. I don't think either one is great shakes, but I think they did about as much as anyone could with the sort of tissue-thin characters they were given. The main issue with the film is that it had entirely the wrong focus. Rather than being a simple revenge fantasia, the crux of the movie should have been the dynamic between the Priest and the Butcher, and how the former's son bridles against his father's stern Catholic/immigrant upbringing, and who subsequently becomes enchanted by the latter's American rhetoric. Amsterdam works to lose his accent to become more "American", and he turns his back on his father, who sees the dark path his son is going on but is powerless to stop it. But Amsterdam is blinded to the Butcher's poison, and ultimately the Butcher sees an opportunity to use the boy to rid himself of his greatest nemesis. He tells Amsterdam to bring his father to a summit to talk a truce, and Amsterdam goes to his father. The Priest knows that it is a trap, but he realizes this is the only way for his son to truly realize what is at stake, so he goes to the meet. The Butcher assassinates the Priest, and Amsterdam comes to realize what he has done. Then the revenge subplot feels earned. It baffles me how Scorsese could spend thirty years on this project, create the most immersive historical "world" I've ever seen in a movie, and come out with such a basic by-the-numbers story.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 9, 2018 5:02:55 GMT
I get what you are saying, but DDL created that reputation for himself. It's mostly benefitted him in terms of esteem (which was probably the point), but it's created those few holes that can be used to argue against him. It's a trade-off I guess he's happy with. But I do wonder if even Day-Lewis views Washington's career, with less self imposed limitations and restrictions, with a bit of envy. I'm sure Day-Lewis is very happy with the way his career has gone. He probably could secure work with just about anyone in the world if he wanted to. Tarantino is the only one to actively turn him away, and that was before the "DDL legend" really became what it is today. I'm sure that if he wanted a Washington-esque career, where he was taking on blockbusters as well as doing his typical fare, he could probably have done that. Last of the Mohicans proved that he would've been remarkably adept at carrying such a film, even if it is more of a "prestige" movie than most of what Washington does. The difference is that Washington commands a consistent box-office, whereas Day-Lewis's most lucrative movie was a Spielberg film about a beloved American icon. But then that is also chalked up to the sort of movies he makes. If Day-Lewis were doing more movies like Last of the Mohicans instead of going into semi-retirement and taking huge sabbaticals, he might've enjoyed a promising career on the level of what Washington did, and might have even prevented other actors of his generation like Russell Crowe from really making landfall here. I do imagine that Day-Lewis probably admires the hell out of Washington, but he probably also recognizes that what Washington has accomplished isn't necessarily what he himself would want. Not just talking about Washington's movie career though. Day-Lewis was made in the theatre, and still seems to be an avid theatre goer in New York by many reports. Day-Lewis last experience on stage was traumatic to say the least, but most actors who have done as much stage as Day-Lewis did at one point, always have it in their blood and dream of those stage triumphs (even though stage can be terrifying, even to the most seasoned of actors). I found it interesting that Marlon Brando was constantly lecturing young actors (like Johnny Depp) to go on stage, even though he pretty much abandoned it after his Broadway run of A Streetcar Named Desire. Brando always held theatre in huge esteem, despite realising he could make an easier living on film. You've got Gary Oldman now talking enthusiatically about possibly going back on stage again after a near 30 year absence. I don't think it's concidence that Oldman has been talking about Washington's upcoming Broadway show in his interviews, and how much he admires Washington still taking on the grind and risk of live theatre. Wouldn't be surprised if seeing Washington's example is partially behind Oldman's newfound determination to go back to his stage roots. I've always imagined Day-Lewis wanted a legendary stage run to call his own, as part of his CV. He obviously did some fine stage work in the 80's, but he never stuck it out to achieve something legendary on the boards (like Washington has, or Rylance as a British contemporary). I can see Day-Lewis viewing that as a big regret in his career, and perhaps envying Washington's ability to juggle to movie career with the award-winning Broadway thesping.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 9, 2018 5:18:54 GMT
Not just talking about Washington's movie career though. Day-Lewis was made in the theatre, and still seems to be an avid theatre goer in New York by many reports. Day-Lewis last experience on stage was traumatic to say the least, but most actors who have done as much stage as Day-Lewis did at one point, always have it in their blood and dream of those stage triumphs (even though stage can be terrifying, even to the most seasoned of actors). I found it interesting that Marlon Brando was constantly lecturing young actors (like Johnny Depp) to go on stage, even though he pretty much abandoned it after his Broadway run of A Streetcar Named Desire. Brando always held theatre in huge esteem, despite realising he could make an easier living on film. You've got Gary Oldman now talking enthusiatically about possibly going back on stage again after a near 30 year absence. I don't think it's concidence that Oldman has been talking about Washington's upcoming Broadway show in his interviews, and how much he admires Washington still taking on the grind and risk of live theatre. Wouldn't be surprised if seeing Washington's example is partially behind Oldman's newfound determination to go back to his stage roots. I've always imagined Day-Lewis wanted a legendary stage run to call his own, as part of his CV. He obviously did some fine stage work in the 80's, but he never stuck it out to achieve something legendary on the boards (like Washington has, or Rylance as a British contemporary). I can see Day-Lewis viewing that as a big regret in his career, and perhaps envying Washington's ability to juggle to movie career with the award-winning Broadway thesping. It's very possible that Day-Lewis might envy what Washington does with the stage, but he also might not. At this point, it's all supposition and speculation. Day-Lewis might very well enjoy going to the theater, but he's done stage work and seems to not really care much for it anymore. Hamlet broke him, and for one reason or another, he's never gone back. I don't get the sense he wants to, either. And I don't necessarily think that's the wrong call. His process, his brand, doesn't really lend itself to nightly showcases for extended seasons. But even so, if Day-Lewis wanted to go back to Broadway, he could at any time. Producers would fall over themselves to book him. But if he doesn't, that shouldn't be a knock on him, because he's done it already and garnered some fine notices (maybe not show-stopping level, and the Hamlet incident will forever follow him, but in a way, that actually added to his mystique). I'm glad to see Oldman looking to return to the stage. He's the sort of actor tailor-made for Broadway.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 9, 2018 5:37:32 GMT
Of course producers would fall over Day-Lewis to get him back on stage. I'm sure he could even swing a very limited 9 week run if he wanted to. But stage is not only hard technically, it can be nerve shattering.
Washington made an interesting confession on his Hollywood Reporter directors roundtable last year. He said he doesn't get nervous or anxious acting on film. He knows if he flubs, he'll get another take and no one will be any the wiser in the finished product. But he said on one of his last 3 Broadway shows, he was terrified on Opening night to get on the stage. He wasn't sure if he'd remembered his lines. But he knew he had to get on, despite the fear gripping him. That's what stage can do to even our most confident and capable actors.
This more than anything is why so many esteemed actors avoid stage. Stage Fright is a real thing, and a lot of hugely esteemed actors who have even done theatre have developed it. Especially with the trauma of his Hamlet run, I suppose stage fright is a legitimate concern for Day-Lewis. It would be awesome to see Day-Lewis do stage again though, but I can understand why it's not on the cards for him.
|
|
|
Post by PromNightCarrie on Mar 9, 2018 6:00:22 GMT
Not a bad opinion. He's definitely one of the best to me. But I still say Daniel Day Lewis is better and you'll find many actors and directors who would state that as well.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Mar 9, 2018 6:05:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 9, 2018 18:05:19 GMT
Of course producers would fall over Day-Lewis to get him back on stage. I'm sure he could even swing a very limited 9 week run if he wanted to. But stage is not only hard technically, it can be nerve shattering. Washington made an interesting confession on his Hollywood Reporter directors roundtable last year. He said he doesn't get nervous or anxious acting on film. He knows if he flubs, he'll get another take and no one will be any the wiser in the finished product. But he said on one of his last 3 Broadway shows, he was terrified on Opening night to get on the stage. He wasn't sure if he'd remembered his lines. But he knew he had to get on, despite the fear gripping him. That's what stage can do to even our most confident and capable actors. This more than anything is why so many esteemed actors avoid stage. Stage Fright is a real thing, and a lot of hugely esteemed actors who have even done theatre have developed it. Especially with the trauma of his Hamlet run, I suppose stage fright is a legitimate concern for Day-Lewis. It would be awesome to see Day-Lewis do stage again though, but I can understand why it's not on the cards for him. Indeed. Stage-acting is such a huge risk, and if you're an actor raised in the film/television industry, it can be incredibly intimidating. This is why I respect Jake Gyllenhaal for going to the stage, and why I'm glad to see him doing quite well there. You mentioned years back that it seemed he was inspired by what Washington had done, and I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case . . . but not a whole lot of actors could or would do it. But some just aren't cut out for it.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 3:08:03 GMT
Seeing as how this "Greatest Living Actor" conversation seems to revolve quite a bit around Day-Lewis and Washingtion, I thought I'd make a compilation of their strongest performances (regardless of film quality), to see how many they have;
Daniel Day Lewis
1 My Left Foot 2 There Will Be Blood 3 Gangs Of New York 4 In The Name Of The Father 5 Lincoln 6 Phantom Thread 7 The Age Of Innocence 8 A Room With A View 9 The Unbearable Lightness Of Being 10 My Beautiful Laundrette 11 The Last Of The Mohicans 12 The Boxer 13 The Ballad Of Jack And Rose 14 The Crucible
Denzel Washington
1 Malcolm X 2 Fences 3 He Got Game 4 Training Day 5 Roman J Israel Esq 6 Glory 7 Man On Fire 8 Flight 9 The Hurricane 10 Philidelphia 11 The Manchurian Candidate 12 American Gangster 13 Cry Freedom 14 Inside Man 15 Crimson Tide 16 Devil In A Blue Dress 17 Mo Better Blues 18 Missisipi Massala 19 A Soldier's Story 20 Remember The Titans 21 The Book Of Eli 22 Courage Under Fire 23 Much Ado About Nothing 24 The Preacher's Wife 25 John Q 26 The Bone Collector 27 The Equalizer 28 Fallen
It's impressive how Day-Lewis has built his reputation off such a relatively small sample size of strong performances. He didn't have much room for error. Washington roster of performances is just as strong, but his bench is much deeper (in sports analogy, Washington could field a complete other winning team with his "substitute" performances). So much so that I can leave at least one of his oscar nominated performances outside of his top 10. And I can leave off several commendable performances without losing any sleep over it, because his list is long enough (The Great Debaters, Antwone Fisher, The Magnificent Seven, The Seige, Deja Vu etc).
Looking at both lists, I actually think Washington covers a wider acting range than Day-Lewis as well. He's got the transformative biopics (Malcolm X, Cry Freedom), grand guguinol villains (Training Day), mental and physical impairments (The Bone Collector, The Manchurian Candidate, Roman J Israel Esq), but also Shakespeare (Much Ado About Nothing) and romantic comedy (The Preacher's Wife). A solid balance of contemporary and period. Day-Lewis leans heavily towards period.
I've always been Team Denzel, but looking at Washington's list laid out like that....it's very easy to see how Carnahan came to conclusion that he's lapping the field.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 10, 2018 14:23:58 GMT
See I would say that list is more like "the 2 greatest still hot actors in English language not counting guys still alive because I don't want to count them because they aren't hot and the other guys are old (Ewww!) and that allows me to say Washington has overtaken them when not really he hasn't but I hope no one lists their films because this wouldn't hold up" Whew!).
So let me represent the dissenting view:
If Washington didn't get those 2 nods for a Fences and Roman Israel (completely undeserved for the latter imo) then this comparison wouldn't hold any water (to me it still doesn't) so you're in effect using them as a way to justify a flawed comparison anyway. To me, it's 5-6 great film performances (listed below) for Washington - maybe 1 or 2 more - go 8 then - maybe - parts of AG and The Hurricane, lots of good ones sure - not saying he's not a major player - but I'm really reaching with those last 2. List below is not ranked.
That's specifically comparable to not just Americans like Paul Newman, Jack Lemmon (also fine actors, alas dead) but Al Pacino has that in 71-75 alone, DeNiro has it just from 73-83 alone, Nicholson and Hoffman and the lesser even Duvall and Hackman all have it too and they're um still alive!
Is Washington better than them - well you make the call, but I don't see it as clearly, nor do I see DDL necessarily as superior to his countrymen like Finney, Hopkins, Caine, etc. unless you change the name of the comparison or, those guys, you know.................die.
There is no greatest living actor.........and I'm not including Castellitto and Bardem even .......
Malcolm X Fences Training Day Glory - maybe, I actually find it one note myself but just to make it 6 Flight He Got Game
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 14:51:34 GMT
See I would say that list is more like "the 2 greatest still hot actors in English language not counting guys still alive because I don't want to count them because they aren't hot and the other guys are old (Ewww!) and that allows me to say Washington has overtaken them when not really he hasn't but I hope no one lists their films because this wouldn't hold up" Whew!). So let me represent the dissenting view: If Washington didn't get those 2 nods for a Fences and Roman Israel (completely undeserved for the latter imo) then this comparison wouldn't hold any water (to me it still doesn't) so you're in effect using them as a way to justify a flawed comparison anyway. To me, it's 5-6 great film performances (listed below) for Washington - maybe 1 or 2 more - go 8 then - maybe - parts of AG and The Hurricane, lots of good ones sure - not saying he's not a major player - but I'm really reaching with those last 2. List below is not ranked. That's specifically comparable to not just Americans like Paul Newman, Jack Lemmon (also fine actors, alas dead) but Al Pacino has that in 71-75 alone, DeNiro has it just from 73-83 alone, Nicholson and Hoffman and the lesser even Duvall and Hackman all have it too and they're um still alive! Is Washington better than them - well you make the call, but I don't see it as clearly, nor do I see DDL necessarily as superior to his countrymen like Finney, Hopkins, Caine, etc. unless you change the name of the comparison or, those guys, you know.................die. There is no greatest living actor.........and I'm not including Castellitto and Bardem even ....... Malcolm X Fences Training Day Glory - maybe, I actually find it one note myself but just to make it 6 Flight Training Day
C'mon Pac-Man. You're better than that diatribe in the first paragraph. It's all good though You've downplayed or dismissed Washington performances for years that I consider to be utterly, utterly great. Capital-A Great. And that absolutely your perogative, and I've always accepted that. But you can't get upset when I dismiss it as your opinion, and not some accepted fact that he's got only 5-6 performances you rate as truly/sorta great. I mean that's good for you, but why is that supposed to affect my own judgements?.... You've dismissed my assertions all these years. It is what it is. If I say Roman J Israel is a world class performance, possibly an all-time great one, then to me it is. If I say Denzel is better in Man On fire than Day-Lewis is in Phantom Thread, then that's my truth. If I think Denzel in He Got Game is miles better than Pacino in The Insider, then to me he is. I don't need you, or expect you to agree with me. That's the lovely thing about art isn't it. Subjectvity. The downplaying of Washington in the wider sense is becoming less effective or even credible, because a lot of the industry is seemingly moving in the direction of people like Carnahan, into how Washington is percieved. One has to be able to read the room, so to speak. It is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 10, 2018 14:59:19 GMT
One has to be careful not to misread the room, too. All I'm saying .....
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 15:27:02 GMT
Cryptic Listen, I'm not claiming to be Nostradamus or anything, but I've been predicting this chain of events for years. Penn falling into irrelevency, Hanks struggling to get back the peer respect of the 90's, Washington eventually getting the Streep/Brando industry level reverence etc. I'd say Washington has over 20 straight-up "great" film performances (as opposed to merely good, which takes him closer to 50). As you could easily give him 4th or 5th slot Oscar nominations for things like Devil In A Blue Dress or American Gangster or A Soldier's Story and it wouldn't look remotely odd or out of place. He could/should maybe be on 4-5 acting wins by now. His performance in something like Crimson Tide (where both he and Hackman are out of this world incredible) in the right movie, could easily win Oscars for lesser actors. And I don't even consider Crimson Tide a top 10 performance for him (though I do for Hackman). That's his level. There's a bit of congnitive dissonance with how you percieve Washington and how the majority of his peers and the industry percieve him. They don't think he's some pretty good actor who has been great 5 or 6 times in his career, and most of those times he was duly recognised for. They think he's a master who is almost always great, and often genius-level, even in several performances that come nowhere near awards recognition. Like Erica Bana talking about Man On Fire being the most incisive acting lesson he's ever had. Or Edward Norton writing Washngton a fan note to express how much he admired his performance in He Got Game. And these performances got nowhere near major awards. I think Eric Roberts (a former oscar nominee) was tweeting this awards season that Washington has been "great in every single thing" he's ever done, which is not an uncommon sentiment among actors regarding Washington. The evolution of him becoming arguably the most revered male actor in the industry was based on the percieved excellence of his entire body of performances, not just the ones that recieved awards attention. The industry's and his peers perception of Washington aligns more with my own view on him than yours, and that's just the reality of the situation. To a great many actors, he's already far greater than Brando ever was (which is probably sacrllage to you.lol!) But again, that's how I see things. If your reality is that he's only had 5 and a half great performances or whatever, more power to you. Express yourself. But I don't see things that way, and there are many in his peer group and industry who don't either. So you know, opinions. But again, that's art, old chum.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 20:00:03 GMT
Just found out that Carnahan is directing none other than Mel Gibson in his next project, Boss Level.
I know Gibson just won a Supporting Actor Razzie for Daddy's Home 2, but when he's on the ball he's a very formidable presence. I always used to think Gibson and Washington would have huge chemistry together back 90's (Gibson's peak era), but i could seem them having it still.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 10, 2018 20:11:45 GMT
Just found out that Carnahan is directing none other than Mel Gibson in his next project, Boss Level. I know Gibson just won a Supporting Actor Razzie for Daddy's Home 2, but when he's on, the ball he's a very formidable presence. I always used to think Gibson and Washington would have huge chemistry together back 90's (Gibson's peak era), but i could seem them having it still. Regardless of what one thinks of Mel Gibson as a person, the man has an indisputably high level of talent, chemistry and screen presence. Even his latter-day performances show that he still has "it." I'd argue that he was giving the best performances of his career after his personal troubles became public ( Edge of Darkness/The Beaver/Get the Gringo/Blood Father make for an incredible streak of performances, albeit in films that don't really hold much worth in watching aside from him). Carnahan working with Gibson is a dream I didn't even know I had come true. Gibson would make for a fantastic sparring-partner for one such as Washington. I was extremely stoked when it was announced Gibson and Penn were getting in the ring together for The Professor and the Madman, with Penn playing the lunatic in this case. I've often thought that Gibson was the actor that everyone thought Penn was/wanted to be, but Mad Mel was more of a box-office matinee idol, of which Penn didn't seem to want the label. But as phenomenal an actor as Gibson is, he's an even better director.
|
|
|
Post by SeanJoyce on Mar 10, 2018 21:35:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 21:48:42 GMT
Hmm...you've been posting a worrying amount of GIFs and monosyllables, as opposed to you'know, actual dialogue and intelliglble content (which the Seanjoyce I remember was actually quite good at) I want to believe you actually are SeanJoyce, but this isn't his schtick at all. Hope I'm wrong, and you start resembling your actual self soon.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Mar 10, 2018 21:54:19 GMT
Hmm...you've been posting a worrying amount of GIFs and monosyllables, as opposed to you'know, actual dialogue and intelliglble content (which the Seanjoyce I remember was actually quite good at) I want to believe you actually are SeanJoyce, but this isn't his schtick at all. Hope I'm wrong, and you start resembling your actual self soon. A properly used gif is worth a thousand and seventy three words.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 10, 2018 22:00:46 GMT
Hmm...you've been posting a worrying amount of GIFs and monosyllables, as opposed to you'know, actual dialogue and intelliglble content (which the Seanjoyce I remember was actually quite good at) I want to believe you actually are SeanJoyce, but this isn't his schtick at all. Hope I'm wrong, and you start resembling your actual self soon. A properly used gif is worth a thousand and seventy three words. Not if every post so far from my old pal, "SeanJoyce" is a GIF. Anyone can impersonate anyone in this racket (though why anyone would impersonate Sean in beyond me). I'll know if he's the real deal when he actually holds conversations like he used to.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 11, 2018 4:29:16 GMT
Just found out that Carnahan is directing none other than Mel Gibson in his next project, Boss Level. I know Gibson just won a Supporting Actor Razzie for Daddy's Home 2, but when he's on, the ball he's a very formidable presence. I always used to think Gibson and Washington would have huge chemistry together back 90's (Gibson's peak era), but i could seem them having it still. Regardless of what one thinks of Mel Gibson as a person, the man has an indisputably high level of talent, chemistry and screen presence. Even his latter-day performances show that he still has "it." I'd argue that he was giving the best performances of his career after his personal troubles became public ( Edge of Darkness/The Beaver/Get the Gringo/Blood Father make for an incredible streak of performances, albeit in films that don't really hold much worth in watching aside from him). Carnahan working with Gibson is a dream I didn't even know I had come true. Gibson would make for a fantastic sparring-partner for one such as Washington. I was extremely stoked when it was announced Gibson and Penn were getting in the ring together for The Professor and the Madman, with Penn playing the lunatic in this case. I've often thought that Gibson was the actor that everyone thought Penn was/wanted to be, but Mad Mel was more of a box-office matinee idol, of which Penn didn't seem to want the label. But as phenomenal an actor as Gibson is, he's an even better director. Gibson is interesting. Always thought he was an underrated actor. He's a great director (though Hacksaw Ridge was a bit simplistic to me, but that more down to the script than his directing), but in an alternative universe, I think if he made different choices, he could have been considered one of the great actors of his time. Too many sequels (4 Lethal Weapon movies was too much), not enough challenging roles to counterbalance the blockbustery stuff. Maybe some theatre/stage would have benefitted him as well. I sort of get what you mean with the Penn/Gibson comparison. Gibson was legitimately edgy and dangerous onscreen in the 80's in a way few actors after the 70's generation were (Mickey Rourke most obviously). He made young tyros like Cruise look soft and coddled. He was also probably too good looking for his own good, as he allowed himself to be pushed into the hearthrob market, which can sometimes dilute "serious actor" cache (though not always, as you could argue that guys like Washington and Brando didn't let their looks or sex symbol status detract from their thespian cred). Gibson for me was the legit forebearer to Russell Crowe, another guy that had greatness in his grasp (he was making all the choices required for it, that Gibson didn't), yet fell off so much after 2007, that he's almost become an afterthought in his own country (I feel like Nicole Kidman and Cate Blanchett are regarded as the singular Australian thespians of their generation, far more than Crowe, who was once up there, if not at the very top for a short while, in his post Gladiator peak).
|
|
|
Post by Sullivan on Mar 11, 2018 5:01:25 GMT
A properly used gif is worth a thousand and seventy three words. Not if every post so far from my old pal, "SeanJoyce" is a GIF. Anyone can impersonate anyone in this racket (though why anyone would impersonate Sean in beyond me). I'll know if he's the real deal when he actually holds conversations like he used to. It aint him. He wouldn’t type his name like that, and he is only posting gifs because he can’t type the way the real SJ would. No idea what the plan was here to be honest..
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 11, 2018 5:06:04 GMT
Not if every post so far from my old pal, "SeanJoyce" is a GIF. Anyone can impersonate anyone in this racket (though why anyone would impersonate Sean in beyond me). I'll know if he's the real deal when he actually holds conversations like he used to. It aint him. He wouldn’t type his name like that, and he is only posting gifs because he can’t type the way the real SJ would. No idea what the plan was here to be honest.. Thanks. Glad I'm not the only one who found this version of "SeanJoyce" to be fishy as hell, and nothing like the actual one. Can't understand the motive behind it either.
|
|
|
Post by Kirk-Picard on Mar 11, 2018 9:41:52 GMT
He's not even close to the best of his own generation
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 11, 2018 9:49:28 GMT
He's not even close to the best of his own generation Not that awards mean everything (though they can mean something), but he's the most Oscar nominated actor of his generation (over Day-Lewis, Hanks etc) and the most nominated lead actor in the SAG movie category of all time. I'd say his actual peers...."actors"....disagree with your sentiment. But what do they know.LOL!
|
|
|
Post by Kirk-Picard on Mar 11, 2018 9:57:51 GMT
He's not even close to the best of his own generation Not that awards mean everything, but he's the most Oscar nominated actor of his generation (over Day-Lewis, Hanks etc) and the most nominated lead actor in the SAG movie category of all time. I'd say his actual peers...."actors"....disagree with your sentiment. If its just based on awards,DDL Has 3 LEAD ACTOR WINS at both Oscar and SAG . Wins >>>>> nominations
|
|