I've seen Emily Watson in the movies you mentioned, Punch-Drunk Love and Equilibrium as well as Hilary and Jackie (1998), The Luzhin Defence (2000), Gosford Park (2001). In this short period of time, she has been nominated for an Oscar twice for best actress, even a Saturn Award for best supporting actress her role in Red Dragon, she won the British equivalent of an Oscar for best actress her role in Hillary and Jackie and nominated again for The Luzhin Defence. She was nominated for Golden Globes twice for best actress. In really don't think she's been under-appreciated as much as such hasn't been in enough movies to gain the public's full attention.
Posts: 956 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
Originally posted by tabuno: I've seen Emily Watson in the movies you mentioned, Punch-Drunk Love and Equilibrium as well as Hilary and Jackie (1998), The Luzhin Defence (2000), Gosford Park (2001). In this short period of time, she has been nominated for an Oscar twice for best actress, even a Saturn Award for best supporting actress her role in Red Dragon, she won the British equivalent of an Oscar for best actress her role in Hillary and Jackie and nominated again for The Luzhin Defence. She was nominated for Golden Globes twice for best actress. In really don't think she's been under-appreciated as much as such hasn't been in enough movies to gain the public's full attention.
True. She has been recognized by various award committees for her contributions to film (she’s definitely not “underrated”)… but, I still have the feeling that when one thinks of great actors and actresses, her name slips from people’s minds. This may be just my perception, of course.
Three years ago, I would have only associated her with serious dramas. However, now I see an actress with amazing versatility… a real actress… a true master of the craft. I just have this odd feeling that she will continue to fly under the radar for many more years, no matter how many award winning performances she has… simply because, she is a rarity in Hollywood. She’s definitely not your typical actress… and I think popular opinion is confused by that.
Does this mean that she is under appreciated? Maybe you’re right, tabuno. However, no matter how many movies she makes, I feel she'll still keep a low profile. What I mean by that is… she’s not making waves in the media with outrageous comments or actions. That coupled with the fact that she is not your typical actress will keep her from popularity.
Maybe that’s a blessing in disguise though. If I hear Tom Cruise again claim that he knows the history of psychiatry and that I don’t, I think I’m going to puke. ;-)
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Echolocating,
Posts: 301 | Location: Canada | Registered: 23 June 2005
Emily hasn't been in mainstream movies that generate a lot of publicity. She is not in the public's eye because she hasn't been in the spotlight based on her movie role selections. Even with Red Dragon, all eyes were on Anthony Hopkins. Like Val Kilmer, perhaps, her particular bent is on acting rather than stardom perhaps.
Posts: 956 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
"If it were beneficial, their father would produce children already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the true circumcision in spirit has become profitable in every respect." -Jesus, from the Gospel Of Thomas
Kurt Russell has appeared in almost 50 movies, none of which have really been considered great movies (in part based on award nominations), though a few of his movies have gained good public attention [Silkwood (1983), Big Trouble in Little China (1986), Backdraft (1991), Stargate (1994), Executive Decision (1996)] and one or two have become a mini-classic in their own right [Escape from New York (1981)].
Kurt's performance in Executive Decision was a rather fascinating display of playing against type, the lead character who wasn't really an action figure but is character and acting went well with the script and plot. I don't think, Mr. Russell's script selection has allowed him to really demonstrate his depth of serious acting talent, but he has been able to provide a wide diversity of characters. While his true measure has yet to be seen, what he has accomplished so far is promising.
Posts: 956 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
Originally posted by E.M.: I think many actors/actresses are under-appreciated or not recognized by the public.
I think Gene Hackman can play any role with versatility and depth. His characters are believable and there are few movies he's graced that I haven't enjoyed (Mooseport). I also think Tommy Lee Jones is fantastic. However, he has gotten a little type-casted in the "Fugitive-style" roles. I don't think Sissy Spacek gets her due either.
Boy, you got to carry that weight a long time!
Posts: 401 | Location: Georgia | Registered: 14 October 2005
I am confused by Rev. Rikard's selection of Gene Hackman, Tommy Lee Jones, and Sissy Spacek as actors who are "under-appreciated."
Gene Hackman won an Oscar for Best Supporting Acting for the Unforgiven (1992) and was nominated in for Best Actor for Mississppi Burning (1988). He has previously won Best Actor award for his performance in The French Connection (1971) while just a year earlier he had been nominated for best supporting actor in I Never Sang for My Father as well as in 1967 for Bonnie and Clyde. He's been recognized by Boston Society of Film Critics, Chicago Film Critics, National Board of Review, New York Film Critics Circle, Golden Globes where he even received by Cecile B. DeMille Award!
Tommy Lee Jones won the Best Supporting Actor from the Academy Awards and Golden Globes for The Fugitive (1993) and was nominated for the same award two years earlier for JFK. This year, he won best actor at the Cannes Film Festival for Tres entierros de Melquiades Estrada, Los. He has been recognized by the Chicago Film Critics Association, won an Emmy in 1983.
Sissy Spacek has been nominated six times (1977, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1987, and 2002) for best actress at the Academcy Awards and has won once for Coal Miner's Daughter (1981). She has been recognized by the Boston Film Festival, Broadcast Film Critics Association, Chicago Film Critics Association, New York Film Critics Circle Awards, Sundance Film Festival, and won three Golden Globe Awards.
It appears that all three of these people have received a considerable amount of appreciation.
Posts: 956 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
Originally posted by tabuno: I am confused by Rev. Rikard's selection of Gene Hackman, Tommy Lee Jones, and Sissy Spacek as actors who are "under-appreciated."
Gene Hackman won an Oscar for Best Supporting Acting for the Unforgiven (1992) and was nominated in for Best Actor for Mississppi Burning (1988). He has previously won Best Actor award for his performance in The French Connection (1971) while just a year earlier he had been nominated for best supporting actor in I Never Sang for My Father as well as in 1967 for Bonnie and Clyde. He's been recognized by Boston Society of Film Critics, Chicago Film Critics, National Board of Review, New York Film Critics Circle, Golden Globes where he even received by Cecile B. DeMille Award!
Tommy Lee Jones won the Best Supporting Actor from the Academy Awards and Golden Globes for The Fugitive (1993) and was nominated for the same award two years earlier for JFK. This year, he won best actor at the Cannes Film Festival for Tres entierros de Melquiades Estrada, Los. He has been recognized by the Chicago Film Critics Association, won an Emmy in 1983.
Sissy Spacek has been nominated six times (1977, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1987, and 2002) for best actress at the Academcy Awards and has won once for Coal Miner's Daughter (1981). She has been recognized by the Boston Film Festival, Broadcast Film Critics Association, Chicago Film Critics Association, New York Film Critics Circle Awards, Sundance Film Festival, and won three Golden Globe Awards.
It appears that all three of these people have received a considerable amount of appreciation.
It depends on who is doing the appreciating. If it is the critics and voters for the Oscars I agree. But I think entertainment media does a sorry job in following their achievements (excluding Rolling Stone). When I watch television magazines devoted to entertainment I rarely hear their names. I get three entertainment subscriptions and would have almost go to the archives to read about the craft of these three. They remain relevant and merit some of the better interviews. I read about Tara Reid (sp?), Paris Hilton (House of Wax?), and people who should not be mentioned in the same sentence with Hackman, Spacek and Tommy Lee Jones. These three power houses get their due from media when they win, or star in a role that is undeniably good. I know it can be said that it shouldn't matter what media thinks; but it should! Furthermore, Cody K. said it better than I could. Some great, award winning actors have "slipped from public consciousness." I stand at the water cooler a lot and rarely does anyone say, "Did you see Hackman in . . . ?" Who is underappreciated is a good topic. But, under-appreciated by whom?
Boy, you got to carry that weight a long time!
Posts: 401 | Location: Georgia | Registered: 14 October 2005
It's possible that appreciation could extend to audience popularity and what the readership (profitability) is interested in. What is young and hip, trend setting, new. On the otherhand, there are those people who shun the spotlight and would prefer to avoid the mass media coverage. Some of them don't need it.
Posts: 956 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
I think that it needs to be said: Malcolm McDowell's performance in "A Clockwork Orange" was absolutely brilliant. The film would not be such a classic had somebody else played Alex. McDowell made the movie, if anybody's asking for my opinion.
"Well I tried didn't I Goddammit? At least I did that." - R.P. McMurphy
Posts: 49 | Location: Calgary | Registered: 14 April 2008
