There are a few actors and actresses who I've always thought "If only s/he'd stop taking such crappy scripts s/he'd be worthwhile."

The first name that comes to mind for me is 'Adam Sandler'.

In the movies he's been in that actually require acting, I think he's done awfully well. But I just can not stand his puerile sense of humor. It's all fart, sex references, get hit in the groin. Affect this sort of cheesy preadolescent personality that's supposed to charm the audience and you have 80% of the movies Sandler's ever done.

And he thinks he's an impressionist just because he can make that obnoxious squeak-growl voice he makes in half his films.

Good call on Adam Sandler. I really liked Punch-Drunk Love. It was funny and quirky, yet depressing… and he wasn’t annoying.

This is a really hard topic to relate to because… you have to pick an actor that you admire, but has made a lot of (in your opinion) poor choices for work. That in itself taints the performer’s image in your mind. Hmmm… Cameron Diaz had made a lot of stupid choices in her career… but she is stupid… so that doesn’t count.

Ewan McGregor comes to mind. Not since Trainspotting have I seen him in a movie that I really enjoyed. I think he’s a very talented actor. Shallow Grave is also a pretty good movie for him.

Matt Damon. Good Will Hunting was brilliant… Dogma was clever, but he showed signs of falling into a rut during that period. I'm beginning to get annoyed with Matt as an actor. I hope I don't end up despising his acting as much as I do Tom Cruise's.

Jean Reno comes to mind as well. The Professional was his best… Ronin wasn’t bad, but again… a trend towards stupid Hollywood movies was evident. His absence from movies that I hold in high regard lately could be attributed to the fact that he makes a lot of French films. I don’t speak French. Wasabi was fun, but wasn't up to his potential.

I don't think that Jean Reno, Ewan, or Matt "only make bad films". I also know that you never said they did, I only want to continue down the same route as you. If I could just, not completely follow guidelines and mention Johnny Depp.

Johnny's movies are FANTASTIC, I'm not arguing that. Haven't seen one I haven't liked. Ed Wood being one of his best. Anywhoo, I was thinking, he's way too good for Hollywood.

I'm glad the this topic came up and I agree that Adam Sandler has had both bad and good movies. The same with Jim Carrey. I find it interesting that both began with comedy and than have begun to enter into more dramatic performances in their more recent movies.

quote:

Originally posted by Nickel-Z:
I only want to continue down the same route as you. If I could just, not completely follow guidelines and mention Johnny Depp.

Um… I thought I did follow the guidelines. I wasn’t painting a pretty picture of those three actors as you did with Johnny Depp. I’m saying that they have the potential to be truly great, but keep picking bad scripts, more often than not. They are very inconsistent, in my opinion. Their successes may have been flukes, for all I know.

Unless this topic is for underrated actors who don’t get any recognition for their roles, but make a lot of movies in the mainstream? Maybe I’m the one who is confused.

quote:

Originally posted by Cody K.:
Jean Reno comes to mind as well. The Professional was his best… Ronin wasn’t bad, but again… a trend towards stupid Hollywood movies was evident. His absence from movies that I hold in high regard lately could be attributed to the fact that he makes a lot of French films. I don’t speak French. Wasabi was fun, but wasn't up to his potential.

He takes great french movies though. He is a great french actor and he's been in some really good movie.

This was a difficult question to ponder. I agree with Adam Sandler. Even in some of his overt comedies, like "Big Daddy," he has had flashes. I also agree with Jim Carrey, there has been too much crap in between the good stuff. The one name that comes to mind, which I know I'll catch hell for, is Samuel L. Jackson. I actually like a lot of his stuff, but crap like XXX, Twisted, and Formula 51 disappoints me.

quote:

Originally posted by PRG:
This was a difficult question to ponder. I agree with Adam Sandler. Even in some of his overt comedies, like "Big Daddy," he has had flashes. I also agree with Jim Carrey, there has been too much crap in between the good stuff. The one name that comes to mind, which I know I'll catch hell for, is Samuel L. Jackson. I actually like a lot of his stuff, but crap like XXX, Twisted, and Formula 51 disappoints me.

Samuel L Jackson is a great example, sometimes I get teh feeling that he just takes on whatever script that people offer him without reading it.

I agree with Samuel L Jackson, but you gotta admit hes been in more great films than bad ones.
I think Steve Martin is a genius and is one of my favourite actors but lately his choices of films have been a bit...crappy. Cheaper by the Dozen? Looney Tunes Back in Action? Bringing Down the House? Whats that? Oh well, i forgive him, hes made some hilarious gems.

Ben Affleck isnt nearly as bad as the movies he chooses. More than half of his movies seem to get below a 30 or so on metacritic.

True, Ben Affleck has been in some turkeys (Gigli, arghh). He's also done some ok movies: Daredevil, Dogma, Chasing Amy. But so far Ben hasn't blown me away or impressed me as an actor (his best perormance is, arguably, Daredevil). Maybe one day he'll prove himself to be a good actor but so far, I actually think the movies he's been in reflect his acting: not bad but not very good either.

I respectfully disagree. I am not wholly on-board calling Ben Affleck a good actor. He has flashes, but unlike my contribution of Sam L. Jackson, who is usually good even if the movie isn't, Ben isn't always all that good. My top three Affleck performances are as:
1. Ned Alleyn in Shakespeare in Love
2. Chuckie Sullivan in Good Will Hunting
3. Fred O'Bannion in Dazed and Confused

Holden in Chasing Amy is a close 4th.

Ben Affleck made a good impression on in one of his most brilliant roles in Good Will Hunting (1997) that I don't consider a bad film, in fact it was a great movie.

Armageddon (1998) can't be considered a bad film, a least in terms of money and publicity, and boxoffice power. He performed as well as any actor would in such a movie.

Shakespeare in Love (1998), again a little that could and in fact was a hit when it came out - another not so bad movie.

Forces of Nature (1999), a romantic comedy lightweight - but who cares.

Dogma (1999) reuniting the strength of Matt Damon in a quite different and rather cynical, dark-comedy that actually had good rhythm and flash. Not for everybody but again who cares.

The Sum of All Fears (2002), a decent Jack Ryan (and of course whose shoes was he trying to fill).

There were a number of unmemorable movies during this time, though Pearl Harbor (2001) and Changing Lanes (2002) again were more maintstream films and again who cares.

Daredevil (2003) was one of the beginning comicbook hero wannabees out that had a lot of competition and received mixed reviews but still enjoyable and depending on who was watching quite good. I enjoyed Paycheck (2003) and even Jersey Girl (2004) along with his duds of Gigli (2003) and Surviving Christmas (2004).

I don't think the jury is at all in on Mr. Affleck. He definitely is still a movie actor with credible films under his belt along with some crappy movies. I'm still supporting him as an actor who has done ok and can do better.

Yeah, like I said, he's been in some ok movies and has given ok perormances (I forgot about Changing Lanes, he wasnt bad in that one but, come on, he was terrible in Paycheck) but thats just the thing, he's just an ok actor. All I'm saying is I dont think he should be considered a "good" actor just yet. Maybe one day he'll impress me, who knows.

I'm surprised no one has talked about his forgetable performance in Pearl Harbor. He really is just a decent actor who hasn't proven anything to most people, that's why I can't really put him here.

Good point about Samuel L Jackson, but he really has been making some stinkers lately. Except for star wars and arguably the Negotiator, I can't remember a good modern movie he's been in. Formula 51? xXx? nope.

Samuel L Jackson was in Changing Lanes, which wasn't a bad film, it must be said. But his last great performance I think was in M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable, I really like this film and Jackson was excellent in it, love the Edward Scissorhands-like hair. Oh, he was in The Incredibles too wasn't he?

Yes, he was in that also.

I might nominate Sandra Bullock. She seems to be really talented, but she just picks some absolutely terrible movies to be in.

Sandra Bullock has been a rather two-dimensional actress, performing in mainly romantic comedies, action comedies, and action/thrillers where she has been the comic relief:

Love Potion No. 9 (1992) where she portrayed her dopey role as a research scientist in this romantic comedy, but at the same had a few scenes where she became an enraptured, captured female to this jerk - a more dark-sided humor in one of her earlier movie appearances.

Demolition Man (1993) a sci-fi action/thriller that had a wonderful sense of futuristic lingo, where Sandra is more of a supporting straight character.

Speed (1994) became Sandra's big debut in the this hit action movie, again as a plain jane female role who however can handle herself.

While You Were Sleeping (1995) became Sandra's next big hit in another romantic comedy that still didn't require any expansion of her movie persona.

The Net (1995) an action/thriller of little note.

Speed 2 (1997) big action flop of the year.

Hope Floats (1998) a serious romance drama that didn't really float but did allow Sandra to bring her more dramatic perforance to the big screen.

Practical Magic (1998) a romantic comedy that hones her acting performance with Nicole Kidman.

Forces of Nature (1999) another lukewarm romantic comedy.

Gun Shy (2000) a fusion action/thriller/comedy with Liam Neesom, with a fun character driven piece.

28 Days (2000) is a serious social piece about drug addiction where Sandra does get to really perform.

Miss Congeniality (2000) is a romance comedy that expands Sandra's comedy persona.

Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sister (2002), a more serious comedy about women, that again extends her Practical Magic persona.

Crash (2004) is really Sandra big debut into drama and cast against type where she does demonstrate her ability to being a versatile actress.

Her performances have mostly revolved around her movie personality and she has yet to really break into roles that really are seemingly created for her or cast for her, except crash. The jury is out about how good Sandra really is, but her performances regardless of the movie have been commendable and never subpar.

Edward Nygma

quote:

he (Ben Affleck) was terrible in Paycheck

.

Edward's comments about how terrible Ben Affleck was in Paycheck had me looking at the movie again that paired Ben with Uma Thurman. It's really difficult to see how Ben's performance was terrible in this movie. This movie really isn't a character-driven movie. It's a John Woo movie, under his direction, audiences have become used to his super-over the top action/thrillers not dramas in the form of Broken Arrow (1996), Face/Off (1997), Mission Impossible II (2000). With Paycheck, John Woo did attempt to incorporate a relational story among the more intriguing mystery clue/action/thrills that were supposed to capture the Hitchcock's North by Northwest and Cary Grant's persona. I didn't see anything in Ben Affleck's performance in Paycheck to call "terrible." His scene where he discovers something amiss with his paycheck is actually check intense and compelling and the rest of the movie he is his usual movie personality type that seems consistent with the character he is supposed to play in the movie. There were no obvious points where Ben came out of character, his behavior and expression all conveyed the right flavor of confusion, fear, and emotional perseverance. His martial arts skills while notably less artful, must be considered in the context that Ben's character really wasn't any superhero or special ops military specialist. If anything, Ben's performance was decent and adequate of his role in Paycheck, not terrible.

Ok, "terrible" was perhaps a bit harsh but I just didn't find Ben Afleck convincing one second in this film: his acting was wooden and he just isn't witty or funny enough to be compared with Cary Grant. Ben was also not too convincing in the action sequences, as you've said. I didn't like Paycheck, and I'm a fan o Philip K. Dick's novels. It was a pure "miscasts" movie: John Woo shouldn't have directed it as the story is much too clever for his style of directing, the action scenes feel out of place and the film is left confused and uneven. Ben was not the right choice for this film either, surely Tom Cruise or even Keanu Reeves would have done a better job...ok maybe not Keanu...
I found Uma Thurman strangely disappointing too, after having starred in the Kill Bill movies, it was odd to see her in such an uninteresting role. Her performance was also quite wooden, but I blame the script, not the actors so much.
Admittedly, Ben did what he could with what he was given to work with, the result is a below-average performance in a below-average film, in my opinion.