NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm bored, so I thought I'd post a list of my favorite actors, and a poll to vote on which was best (with other being an option, of course). Incidentally, I'm a film student and I see a lot of movies, and I've noticed that there are probably more good actors than good writers in Hollywood. Of course the greatest actors are probably those who can still make a role great even with crap writing (looking at you, Jeremy Irons;)). Maybe I'll post a follow up thread on who's the worst movie writer:D.

My prediction is that if there is play in this thread, it will contain a lot of people competing to be the person who hates 'Hollywood' the most.

Why do you think I put the option in there?;)

Gary Oldman is my pick.

Tie between Robert Downy Jr. and the most magnificent man-of-a-hundred-faces Jack Nicholson. I also have a fondness for the majority of the cast of West Wing.

Tie between Robert Downy Jr. and the most magnificent man-of-a-hundred-faces Jack Nicholson. I also have a fondness for the majority of the cast of West Wing.

Robert Downey Jr., excellent. Cast of West Wing, fabulous. Jack Nicholson? Here, my friend, we must depart ways. I'll go with you on One Flew Over and Five Easy Pieces, but nothing in the last, say, 25 years.

Christian Bale. Also love Robert Downey Jr.

Never understood why people liked Christian Bale so much. Johnny Depp was my vote, though Jeremy Irons is good. But I couldn't vote for him based on one film with a lousy script(I saw him in Eragon). Still if he could avoid embarresing himself with a script that bad, he must be pretty good.

Robert Downey Jr., excellent. Cast of West Wing, fabulous. Jack Nicholson? Here, my friend, we must depart ways. I'll go with you on One Flew Over and Five Easy Pieces, but nothing in the last, say, 25 years.

WORD.

jack nicholson creeps me out and in the past ....10?...15? years all he has played are increasingly creepier variations of himself. i avoid movies that he is in.

robert downey jr has some indefinable thing that makes him immensely watchable. its a huge shame that he has wasted so much time with drug addiction. i feel the loss of the work he should have been doing all this time.

johnny depp is the best actor of his generation.

and who doesnt love jeremy irons, chrisian bale, andy serkis and gary oldman? WHY HASNT GARY OLDMAN BEEN IN MORE MOVIES, DAMMIT?

there is no sense asking about best, there are too many great actors in the world.

robert downey jr has some indefinable thing that makes him immensely watchable. its a huge shame that he has wasted so much time with drug addiction. i feel the loss of the work he should have been doing all this time.
I agree. Also on the Jack Nicholson thing.

I don't think there is really one "best actor". Most good actors are still not always good, sometimes they're just so-so, sometimes they're miscast, sometimes you can tell they didn't want to be there.

That said, I thought Heath Ledger was incredibly good in most of his roles.

Probably the best performance I remember in recent years was Daniel Day-Lewis in "There will be Blood". Hated the movie, was blown away by him.

and who doesnt love jeremy irons, chrisian bale, andy serkis and gary oldman? WHY HASNT GARY OLDMAN BEEN IN MORE MOVIES, DAMMIT?



Me! Largely I base this on his portrayal of Vetinari in the Colour of Magic. It offended me to my very core.

Tom Hanks, hands down is one of the best, followed by Morgan Freeman.

Cate Blanchett I would say, when you see the differentiation between the characters of Galadriel to Elizabeth I, or to here roles in the Aviator and so on, that you see a good actor.

Where the hell is Tom Hanks?

I'm bored, so I thought I'd post a list of my favorite actors, and a poll to vote on which was best (with other being an option, of course). Incidentally, I'm a film student and I see a lot of movies, and I've noticed that there are probably more good actors than good writers in Hollywood. Of course the greatest actors are probably those who can still make a role great even with crap writing (looking at you, Jeremy Irons;)). Maybe I'll post a follow up thread on who's the worst movie writer:D.

Yeah, except you couldn't name any could you? COULD YOU?

*Tries to let it go*

Okay, Depp is great. As is Kevin Spacey, De Niro. Hoffman, Downey Jr, Washington, Daniel Day Lewis are all worthwhile. Oh, and a shout out to epic character actor Stephen Tobolowsky.

Hm. I'm not sure. Edward Norton maybe?

Edit: Leonardo DiCaprio is underrated also.

I'm bored, so I thought I'd post a list of my favorite actors, and a poll to vote on which was best (with other being an option, of course). Incidentally, I'm a film student and I see a lot of movies, and I've noticed that there are probably more good actors than good writers in Hollywood. Of course the greatest actors are probably those who can still make a role great even with crap writing (looking at you, Jeremy Irons;)). Maybe I'll post a follow up thread on who's the worst movie writer:D.You're a film student but could only come up with four actors to put in the poll?

Hm. I'm not sure. Edward Norton maybe?

Edit: Leonardo DiCaprio is underrated also.

You're a film student but could only come up with four actors to put in the poll?

i love edward norton. he does good work.

and john cusack who i tend to get him confused with.

they both have an eye for a good project and do a good job.

and i think that leonardo dicaprio gets unfairly dissed for his huge popularity from titanic. he has to be a good actor to get such acclaim out of that piece of shit script.

and if you look at his other work you see that he knows his craft, picks interesting projects, and the camera loves him.

Out of the ones on the list, Johnny Depp. Easily.

Christian Bale.

Jeremy Irons tops my list. But I would also say Gary Oldman, Sir Ian McKellen, Sir Christopher Lee and Johnny Depp are all excellent.

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/4/8/9/489e8262f8dc4b8ba64dba7ef3909203.jpg

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Jimmy Stewart or Carey Grant. They're my favorites.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Jimmy Stewart or Carey Grant. They're my favorites.

I think people are talking about people who are still alive/working. If we got historical picks I'd bust out a thirty strong list.

I think people are talking about people who are still alive/working. If we got historical picks I'd bust out a thirty strong list.

no kidding.

and what if we had to include stage actors too? the list would never end.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Jimmy Stewart or Carey Grant. They're my favorites.

I think people are talking about people who are still alive/working. If we got historical picks I'd bust out a thirty strong list.

Gregory Peck, Gary Cooper, and you have to mention John Wayne because I'm sure the 11th commandment says "Thou shalt not create a 'best actors' list without including John Wayne lest the legions of Western fans pummel thee nigh unto death."

Jack Nicholson? Here, my friend, we must depart ways. I'll go with you on One Flew Over and Five Easy Pieces, but nothing in the last, say, 25 years.
Go see About Schmidt.

Now.


EDIT: And his performance in The Departed is pretty damn good.

For best, I'd have to go with versatility.

Dustin Hoffman. *nod*

I only included these four because they are my personal favorites. I said that up front. Nonetheless, I now wish I had remembered to include Tom Hanks and Geffory Rush( I know I misspelled his name).

Also, no female actors? I know my choices were all male, but I'm surprised there are so few mentions of women. Or did people assume actor meant male?

I only included these four because they are my personal favorites. I said that up front. Nonetheless, I now wish I had remembered to include Tom Hanks and Geffory Rush( I know I misspelled his name).

Also, no female actors? I know my choices were all male, but I'm surprised there are so few mentions of women. Or did people assume actor meant male?

isnt it silly enough to pick out the best male actors without trying to compare the sexes to each other too?

I'm bored, so I thought I'd post a list of my favorite actors, and a poll to vote on which was best (with other being an option, of course). Incidentally, I'm a film student and I see a lot of movies, and I've noticed that there are probably more good actors than good writers in Hollywood. Of course the greatest actors are probably those who can still make a role great even with crap writing (looking at you, Jeremy Irons;)). Maybe I'll post a follow up thread on who's the worst movie writer:D.

Andy Serkis is good, although "Lord of the Rings" (while good) isn't his best performance. His portrayal of Quinn in "Deathwatch" was a tour de force.

Of the list you give, Depp probably stands head-and-shoulders above the rest, for versatility, for high-quality of his canon, and for individual brilliance of performance.

Of those not on the list - Brad Pitt is probably one of the best actors of his generation (see him in Twelve Monkeys or Fight Club), Christian Bale and John Cusack... Kevin Spacey, John Malkovich, Jude Law (perhaps, Gattaca is a strong argument), Robert Downey Jr. (especially in "A Scanner Darkly"). Brad Dourif and Lance Henriksen are both sorely under-rated.

Winona Ryder has moments of astounding brilliance (Girl, Interrupted or A Scanner Darkly), Emily Watson...

So many good choices.

Greatest (that I have seen...there are many I have not)
Marlon Brando
Judi Dench
Sir Anthony Hopkins
Audrey Hepburn
Gregory Peck

Favourites
Marlon Brando
Keira Knightley
Ellen Page
Heath Ledger
Johnny Depp
Juliette Binoche
Ralph Fiennes
Kenneth Brannaugh

Stage Actors
Raul Esparza
Patti LuPone
Mandy Patinkin
Bernadette Peters
Donna Murphy

Most Influential of All Time
Constantin Stanislavski.

That's just what I can come up with off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.

WORD.

jack nicholson creeps me out and in the past ....10?...15? years all he has played are increasingly creepier variations of himself. i avoid movies that he is in.

robert downey jr has some indefinable thing that makes him immensely watchable. its a huge shame that he has wasted so much time with drug addiction. i feel the loss of the work he should have been doing all this time.

johnny depp is the best actor of his generation.

and who doesnt love jeremy irons, chrisian bale, andy serkis and gary oldman? WHY HASNT GARY OLDMAN BEEN IN MORE MOVIES, DAMMIT?

there is no sense asking about best, there are too many great actors in the world.

Robert Downey Jr. has an undefinable charisma and appeal, a genuineness and a devil-may-care about him that makes him impossible to look away from. He inhabits his roles; he makes it look effortless.

Gary Oldman has never received the recognition he deserves, and never will. He's a chameleon, but he's not Hollywood's Leading Man.

Alan Rickman, Orson Welles or Anthony Hopkins.

Although, I've always had a soft spot for Alan Alda from MASH.

Never understood why people liked Christian Bale so much. Johnny Depp was my vote, though Jeremy Irons is good. But I couldn't vote for him based on one film with a lousy script(I saw him in Eragon). Still if he could avoid embarresing himself with a script that bad, he must be pretty good.

How many of Bale's movies have you seen? He inhabits his characters. He lives in their skin. His work with accents alone is phenomenal--he's never done the same accent twice in his films. He was frighteningly good in "Empire of the Sun", magnificent in "Velvet Goldmine", perfect in "American Psycho" and beyond amazing in "The Prestige", to name a few.

Hm. I'm not sure. Edward Norton maybe?

Edit: Leonardo DiCaprio is underrated also.

Agreed about both. Edward Norton used to be one of my favorite actors (American History X is in my top five movies), but I've been disappointed by many of the choices he's made. He was great in the semi-recent "The Painted Veil", though.

DiCaprio will never live down Titanic, but anyone who's seen "What's Eating Gilbert Grape", "Marvin's Room" and "The Departed" knows he has range.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Jimmy Stewart or Carey Grant. They're my favorites.

I have never cared for Jimmy Stewart. If we're going classic, I'll take Gregory Peck.

EDIT: And his performance in The Departed is pretty damn good.

That's because his role in "The Departed" was specifically written FOR him. The writer had him in mind when he wrote it, and it played to all his strengths--namely smirking, looking crazy and showing no emotional range.

Of those not on the list - Brad Pitt is probably one of the best actors of his generation (see him in Twelve Monkeys or Fight Club)

I would say that Brad Pitt was quite good in both of those movies, but he is not a good actor overall. He works best when he's playing crazy and/or funny (see Also "Ocean's Eleven"). His performances on the whole are very inconsistent. I caught a piece of "Legends of the Fall" the other day where he was in a scene with Aidan Quinn, and I actually thought the scene was a nice bit of intensity and passion from Pitt, but Quinn was masterful in his subtlety and depth, the nuances of voice and face and movement.

Actually, add Aidan Quinn to the list. And for shame I have not mentioned sir Anthony Hopkins! I adore Alan Rickman as well.

Best Actors:
1.Sean Connery
2.Johnny Depp
3.Samuel L. Jackson
4.Harrison Ford
5.Jack Nicholson
6.Michael Keaton
7.Laurence Fishburne
8.Robert Downey Jr.
9.Mike Meyers
10.Jack Black

Alan Rickman, Orson Welles or Anthony Hopkins.

Although, I've always had a soft spot for Alan Alda from MASH.

Too funny, I JUST chided myself for forgetting Rickman and Hopkins. :)

Best Actors:
1.Sean Connery
2.Johnny Depp
3.Samuel L. Jackson
4.Harrison Ford
5.Jack Nicholson
6.Michael Keaton
7.Laurence Fishburne
8.Robert Downey Jr.
9.Mike Meyers
10.Jack Black

1. Never been impressed.
6. Good mention. "Clean and Sober" was especially masterful.
3, 4, 10. Seriously?

Too funny, I JUST chided myself for forgetting Rickman and Hopkins. :)

How can you forget Alan Rickman? Shame!;)

1. Never been impressed.
6. Good mention. "Clean and Sober" was especially masterful.
3, 4, 10. Seriously?

It may seem a little odd, but i just havent seen a movie they were in i didnt like, Jack Black and Mike Meyers are my favorite Movie Comedians...

and Jackson's performances in SWAT, and Star Wars are some of my favorites...cant wait to see him as Nick Fury...

and then Harrison Ford, you cant say you dont like Han Solo or Indiana Jones, and i thought his performance in Patriot Games was awesome...

And of course Sean Connery's roles in Indiana Jones, the Hunt for Red October, the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, the Highlander Series, the list goes on and on, there just hasnt been a movie or character that he hasnt done exceptionally well, and lets not forget that he was the best James Bond...

EDIT: and i had Batman and Beetlejuice on the brain when i thought of Five and Six, there two of my favorite movies...coincidentally Tim Burton's my favorite director, lol

and then Harrison Ford, you cant say you dont like Han Solo or Indiana Jones, and i thought his performance in Patriot Games was awesome...

And of course Sean Connery's roles in Indiana Jones, the Hunt for Red October, the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, the Highlander Series, the list goes on and on, there just hasnt been a movie or character that he hasnt done exceptionally well, and lets not forget that he was the best James Bond...

EDIT: and i had Batman and Beetlejuice on the brain when i thought of Five and Six, there two of my favorite movies...coincidentally Tim Burton's my favorite director, lol

I do love Han Solo and Indiana Jones (hello, I'm an American female! how could I not?) but I think those were great roles Ford snagged and they don't show a great range of depth. I certainly enjoyed him immensely in them, I just don't think those roles, or his performances in them, qualify him as a great actor.

Personally, I love Bruce Willis movies. I will really watch any movie he's in--Die Hard, The Fifth Element, Sixteen Blocks, the Sixth Sense, etc etc. There's something about him I just find engaging, but I don't think he's a "great" actor--certainly not worthy of this list.

I do love Han Solo and Indiana Jones (hello, I'm an American female! how could I not?) but I think those were great roles Ford snagged and they don't show a great range of depth. I certainly enjoyed him immensely in them, I just don't think those roles, or his performances in them, qualify him as a great actor.

Personally, I love Bruce Willis movies. I will really watch any movie he's in--Die Hard, The Fifth Element, Sixteen Blocks, the Sixth Sense, etc etc. There's something about him I just find engaging, but I don't think he's a "great" actor--certainly not worthy of this list.

Your probably right, but i was just explaining my reasoning...

I was taking a much more Personal view in it, in that it wasnt about how much range or depth they showed, but, rather How much i liked the Movies they were in and the Characters they were playing, lol...

Cant believe i forgot Christopher Lambert though i thought of him like right after i posted that, again Highlander ruled, and he fuckin ruled as Raiden in Mortal Kombat, lol

Tom Hanks, hands down is one of the best, followed by Morgan Freeman.

Tom Hanks in saving private Ryan was awesome

but Morgan Freeman in the shawshank redemtion was good but the guy who was warden Norton had a hard character

I would say that Brad Pitt was quite good in both of those movies, but he is not a good actor overall. He works best when he's playing crazy and/or funny (see Also "Ocean's Eleven"). His performances on the whole are very inconsistent. I caught a piece of "Legends of the Fall" the other day where he was in a scene with Aidan Quinn, and I actually thought the scene was a nice bit of intensity and passion from Pitt, but Quinn was masterful in his subtlety and depth, the nuances of voice and face and movement.


I would say that Pitt was astounding in Fight Club, and (especially) in Twelve Monkeys (his best role, imho). He wasn't great in Joe Black, but there's a certain amount of excuse for that (the same, in fact, as Winona's horrible performance in Alien:Resurrection), but the only role I've ever thought him actually bad in, was "Devil's Own"... and - in his defence - that movie did have the kiss of death (Harrison Ford) in it.

None of them can hold a candle to Victor Mature, surely the finest movie actor ever to set foot in Hollywood.

Pete Postlethwaite

Casey Affleck.

None of them can hold a candle to Victor Mature, surely the finest movie actor ever to set foot in Hollywood.

better than gregory peck? better than marlon brando? better than james dean??

this must be a joke post.

Ian McShane - Deadwood's Al Swerengen

Dominic Chianese - Soprano's Uncle Jr.

Andreas Katsulas - Babylon 5's G'Kar

I'll add David Strathairn. And August Diehl, a brilliant German actor.

Also, no female actors? I know my choices were all male, but I'm surprised there are so few mentions of women. Or did people assume actor meant male?
I assumed actor meant male. I'm pretty sure most people who gave only male names did so, too.

For actresses, some that come to mind that pretty consistently deliver very good performances are probably Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore, Laura Linney, Judi Dench and Fernanda Montenegro. Imelda Staunton was terrific in Vera Drake.

That's because his role in "The Departed" was specifically written FOR him. The writer had him in mind when he wrote it, and it played to all his strengths--namely smirking, looking crazy and showing no emotional range. :D

How many of Bale's movies have you seen? He inhabits his characters. He lives in their skin. His work with accents alone is phenomenal--he's never done the same accent twice in his films. He was frighteningly good in "Empire of the Sun", magnificent in "Velvet Goldmine", perfect in "American Psycho" and beyond amazing in "The Prestige", to name a few.
Not to forget his superb performance in The Machinist.

That's because his role in "The Departed" was specifically written FOR him.
That's not entirely true. His character was tweaked after he got the role, IIRC.

The writer had him in mind when he wrote it, and it played to all his strengths--namely smirking, looking crazy and showing no emotional range.
If you believe that, I'd recommend that you also watch About Schmidt. Sure, he's often type-cast, especially in the past few years, and he does the 'grinning bastard' role a lot, but saying that he's got no emotional range is going overboard.

Casey Affleck.

Ooh, good one. Gone, Baby, Gone blew me away.

Not to forget his superb performance in The Machinist.

Indeed. Hell, he's even good in bad movies--I recall a summary of Swing Kids, I believe, that said he was the only remotely redeeming aspect of the movie. Can't forget 3:10 to Yuma, either, though that brings up Russell Crowe, about whom I'm never quite sure how I feel.

If you believe that, I'd recommend that you also watch About Schmidt. Sure, he's often type-cast, especially in the past few years, and he does the 'grinning bastard' role a lot, but saying that he's got no emotional range is going overboard.

Little column A, little column B, I suppose. I admit I found him quite good in As Good As It Gets. Haven't seen About Schmidt, but when I find the time I'll rent it and see if it can change my mind. ;)

Gone Baby Gone had some good aspects, but I recall that the moral dilemma at the end was rather contrived.

Gone Baby Gone had some good aspects, but I recall that the moral dilemma at the end was rather contrived.

yes but is that casey afflecks fault?

he did a good job but he is far too new to acting to be on anyone's list of best actor. favorite maybe but not best.

I don't remember the movie well enough to comment on his acting, but the plot doesn't necissarily affect the quality of his acting. Like I already said, I think there are a lot more decent actors in Hollywood than there are decent writers.

Little column A, little column B, I suppose. I admit I found him quite good in As Good As It Gets. Haven't seen About Schmidt, but when I find the time I'll rent it and see if it can change my mind. ;)
Please, please, please do.

It's a glorious little gem of a film.


he did a good job but he is far too new to acting to be on anyone's list of best actor. favorite maybe but not best.
Far too soon, certainly. However, his stints in Gone, Baby, Gone and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (one of the best films of the year, IMHO) make me want to keep an eye on him.

I don't remember the movie well enough to comment on his acting, but the plot doesn't necissarily affect the quality of his acting. Like I already said, I think there are a lot more decent actors in Hollywood than there are decent writers.

How could you possibly know? How many writing careers are you following?

My favorite actor? Harrison Ford.

Most of Hollywood? BURN!

Far too soon, certainly. However, his stints in Gone, Baby, Gone and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (one of the best films of the year, IMHO) make me want to keep an eye on him.

that movie was so tedious that i was glad that i got it on netflix so i didnt have to force myself to watch it to the end.

but yeah, i hope that casey makes a good career of it. i like his acting style.

I just see more good acting overall than good writing. Plus there are times where an otherwise good actor does a poor job because of a lousy script (Depp in Pirates Of The Carribean 2), or where a good performance is masked by silly/poor dialog(Palpatine in Star Wars Episode 3).

I just see more good acting overall than good writing. Plus there are times where an otherwise good actor does a poor job because of a lousy script (Depp in Pirates Of The Carribean 2), or where a good performance is masked by silly/poor dialog(Palpatine in Star Wars Episode 3).

If it's "masked" then how do you know that the problem isn't bad delivery? Or that Depp's peformance in the original POTC wasn't due to the great script? And when you see a great film, how often do you run out of the theatre exclaiming "what great writing?". Blaming the writer(s), praising the director and (especially) the actors isn't just lazy, it's completely misguided.

Peter North.

<.<
>.>
o.0

that movie was so tedious that i was glad that i got it on netflix so i didnt have to force myself to watch it to the end.
I was hooked all the way through, but then I don't mind slow pacing.

And the cinematography was outstanding.

but yeah, i hope that casey makes a good career of it. i like his acting style.
Better than his brother anyway.

When I see an actor who otherwise gives astounding performances fall far below there usual standard, and the screenplay also happens to be much poorer than the material they usually work with, I tend to make a connection. It might not always hold true, but it seems to be the case far to often.

As to how I could tell it was a good performance despite it being masked, I couldn't. I heard critics praise Palpatine in Episode 3, but I couldn't see it until I had gone back and re-watched it a couple times. I believe that this is because I was focusing on Lucas's notoriously weak dialog, and failing to see that a good actor was doing the best job they could with weak material.

Also, how is it "lazy" to blame the writers if the writers are the ones at fault? I suppose one could argue that a great actor should be able to give a decent performance even with lousy writing, but it must be a lot harder. You can only do so much with lousy material. It's like asking a great architect to build a skyscraper out of Medieval quality building materials.

When I see an actor who otherwise gives astounding performances fall far below there usual standard, and the screenplay also happens to be much poorer than the material they usually work with, I tend to make a connection. It might not always hold true, but it seems to be the case far to often.

Because you follow the careers of actors. So therefore "Depp isn't doing great, maybe it's the writing" is going to pop into your head but "Terry Rossio is normally great, maybe this actor is fluffing it. Or the director has nuked this scene" is probably not going to. Also, good writing is often chalked up as good acting - think about interviewers asking actors about "creating" characters.

Also, how is it "lazy" to blame the writers if the writers are the ones at fault?

Because it's incredibly hard to tell who is at fault. Writers are basically nameless, history-less nothings to audiences and critics and that makes them the easiest of targets.

I suppose one could argue that a great actor should be able to give a decent performance even with lousy writing, but it must be a lot harder. You can only do so much with lousy material. It's like asking a great architect to build a skyscraper out of Medieval quality building materials.

Have you ever - EVER - read a review of a film (adaptions of plays excluded) that read: "Unfortunately, bad performances from the actors and clueless direction make the top notch writing look ordinary"? You haven't.

But surely, even if Hollywood's acting is generally of better quality than its writing, the script has been better than the acting in at least a couple of films? And after all, no one has come out of a lousy high school production of Romeo & Juliet blaming Shakespeare.

The trend to blame writers betrays a lack of knowledge about how films are made. Film students should be amongst those trying to find out more; they should not just accept the lazy half-truths they're handed by popular opinion.

Best Actors:
1.Sean Connery
2.Johnny Depp
3.Samuel L. Jackson
4.Harrison Ford
5.Jack Nicholson
6.Michael Keaton
7.Laurence Fishburne
8.Robert Downey Jr.
9.Mike Meyers
10.Jack Black

WHAT??? That would be like saying Adam Sandler is a good actor.

WHAT??? That would be like saying Adam Sandler is a good actor.

oh but youre OK with mike myers whose acting consists of mugging for the camera?

Have you ever - EVER - read a review of a film (adaptions of plays excluded) that read: "Unfortunately, bad performances from the actors and clueless direction make the top notch writing look ordinary"?
Yup. I've also sought out TV shows/movies because I've liked the writing on other shows the writers have done.

Moreover, there are some writers who break through the director/actor dominance in the industry; though they do tend to be more involved than 'merely' writing. Think of someone like Aaron Sorkin. EDIT> Or Charlie Kaufman.

Noting that the question wasn't aimed at myself
oh but youre OK with mike myers whose acting consists of mugging for the camera?
Or fucking Sean Connery?

.

The trend to blame writers betrays a lack of knowledge about how films are made. Film students should be amongst those trying to find out more; they should not just accept the lazy half-truths they're handed by popular opinion.

writers are all but annonymous. i remember looking through a book of famous quote by women and more than half were movie quotes attributed to the actress who spoke the line instead of the writer who thought it up.

thats just wrong.

Noting that the question wasn't aimed at myself

Or fucking Sean Connery?

sean connery may not be the best actor but he at least has a body of work that he can be proud of. and he had a certain charm.

Yup. I've also sought out TV shows/movies because I've liked the writing on other shows the writers have done.

Assuming this wasn't TV and was actually a Hollywood movie, I'd love to see that review (not that I'm asking you to produce it). Because I've never seen anything like it. And, if I may ask, what movies have you sought out based on a writer?

Moreover, there are some writers who break through the director/actor dominance in the industry; though they do tend to be more involved than 'merely' writing. Think of someone like Aaron Sorkin.

TV is different. And even then, like you say, he wasn't just a writer. The only Hollywood movie writer who has managed to make an impact for writing is Kaufman and even he is now directing.

oh but youre OK with mike myers whose acting consists of mugging for the camera?

No I am not ok with Mike Myers either he isn't good, there are a few more on his list that I could pull out and ask why they would be included.

Assuming this wasn't TV and was actually a Hollywood movie, I'd love to see that review (not that I'm asking you to produce it). Because I've never seen anything like it.
When I used to buy Empire, the UK film magazine, it would often talk about the writing/writer, and mention new projects by writers who had previously produced good work. Furthermore, sources from AICN to Variety often mention writers' new projects.

And, if I may ask, what movies have you sought out based on a writer?
Adaptation, on the back of Kaufman's writing in Being John Malkovich, comes to mind. There's been others.

My prediction is that if there is play in this thread, it will contain a lot of people competing to be the person who hates 'Hollywood' the most.
Hey, look who's an asshole...
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g24/mandolian888/muffin.jpg
Yep, I'm the asshole...fantastic...
I believe that this is because I was focusing on Lucas's notoriously weak dialog,

Pfff...what are you talking about. "When last we met, I was but a learner..."

Oh, right...
The only Hollywood movie writer who has managed to make an impact for writing is Kaufman and even he is now directing.
Honestly, it's the only way to protect your writing. Without being directly in charge the nonsense I've seen on set that happens to a script...it's just sad. We'll spend an hour and a half inching the camera one way or another, but when it's a question of script it's "Yeah yeah, whatever." Having seen that enough times I'm inclined to say that not all bad writing is bad writing, but bad stewardship over the writing.

See, in theater they can't fuck with your shit. You just don't get paid hardly anything.

When I used to buy Empire, the UK film magazine, it would often talk about the writing/writer, and mention new projects by writers who had previously produced good work. Furthermore, sources from AICN to Variety often mention writers' new projects.

I never really read Empire. I might check it online. With ACIN and Variety, it's often business more than anything else.

Adaptation, on the back of Kaufman's writing in Being John Malkovich, comes to mind. There's been others.

Kaufman is the exception that proves the rule. He's probably the only writer who I've seen mentioned by name in the trailer.


Honestly, it's the only way to protect your writing.

Sad but true. Many of the best directors only became directors because they had to protect their work.

Without being directly in charge the nonsense I've seen on set that happens to a script...it's just sad. We'll spend an hour and a half inching the camera one way or another, but when it's a question of script it's "Yeah yeah, whatever." Having seen that enough times I'm inclined to say that not all bad writing is bad writing, but bad stewardship over the writing.

Writers not being allowed on set is nuts. There's a great story on a writers board somewhere on the interwebs where a writer was allowed one day for a set visit, picked the day when the most money was being spent, took the director aside and said "before you start this million dollar scene, can I tell you that character x over there is dead at this point?" to which the director memorably replied "it doesn't say on this page that she's dead". You'd think she'd have been invited back the next day.

One of the big myths is that film is a purely visual medium. It's an audio visual way of telling a story. Dialogue is important. Characters are important. Writing is important.

Having said all that, I suspect you ain't seen nothin'. You should hang out in pre-production where there are notes can blow your mind, great scripts getting shelved for no reason, new writers coming in. God, I'm making myself depressed.

There was an early draft of the Truman Show that was ten times as good as the finished film. There's a Godzilla draft lying around that knocks the kaplonkas out of the junk that was filmed. Hell, even the fantastic Groundhog Day would probably have been better had they gone with the early version. We don't see those writers getting fucked over by directors though. It's all hiddden away.

That turned into quite a rant. Oh dear.

See, in theater they can't fuck with your shit. You just don't get paid hardly anything.

Been there amigo. Unfortunately, I'm too greedy to starve for my art.

Although there was this awful Indian dance production of one of my darlings. Nothing is perfect!

Although there was this awful Indian dance production of one of my darlings. Nothing is perfect!

Yeah, I had a slacker comedy directed by a guy who hated slackers...the poor thing never stood a chance (though, to be fair to him, it was a shit play as well...I think you have to write one piece of shit that people actually see so that after that you go, "Oh man, I'm not letting that happen again..."

Contrary to your misrepresentation, I never claimed there were no examples where the writing was superior to the acting. I am aware that writers are sometimes under appreciated, and its definitely of concern to me, given that I planned on being a writer myself. Probably there would be more good writers if their work was more appreciated.

However, I have time and again seen good acting impeded by bad writing. You seem to have my previous statements backward. I did not see Depp giving a poor performance and assume that the writing must therefor be bad. I saw bad writing, and figured that it must play a role in Depp's performance. It seemed unlikely to me that Depp would give the only weak performance I've seen from him in a movie with bad writing, and that the two things would coincidentally be completely unrelated.

You've made some good points about the way in which writers are undervalued. Your mistake was in assuming that I shared the views of some ignorant critics. I do not "just accept the lazy half-truths their handed by popular opinion." Please don't drag this thread down to the level of personal insults.

I never really read Empire. I might check it online.
It's far too overly positive, but it's a good source for info.

With ACIN and Variety, it's often business more than anything else.
Especially Variety, but both (and other sources) still talk about writers and their projects.

Contrary to your misrepresentation, I never claimed there were no examples where the writing was superior to the acting.

I never said you were, I was just illustrating how writers end up being basically skips that people dump all their critisism into.

I am aware that writers are sometimes under appreciated, and its definitely of concern to me, given that I planned on being a writer myself. Probably there would be more good writers if their work was more appreciated.

However, I have time and again seen good acting impeded by bad writing. You seem to have my previous statements backward. I did not see Depp giving a poor performance and assume that the writing must therefor be bad. I saw bad writing, and figured that it must play a role in Depp's performance. It seemed unlikely to me that Depp would give the only weak performance I've seen from him in a movie with bad writing, and that the two things would coincidentally be completely unrelated.

What I was trying to do was explain how difficult it is to know what is bad writing, bad acting, bad direction or whatever. You're missing the point when you talk about "noticing bad writing", which is that you don't know that what you've seen is the fault of the writer(s) or not.

You've made some good points about the way in which writers are undervalued. Your mistake was in assuming that I shared the views of some ignorant critics. I do not "just accept the lazy half-truths their handed by popular opinion." Please don't drag this thread down to the level of personal insults.

It's not "ignorant critics" or "tabloid reviews", its nearly all critics. Even the good, interestring ones make the same mistake because it makes their lives so much easier. And if you think being accused of making the same mistake as some of the best critics in the world is a personal insult then your skin must be pretty thin.

Perhaps I should have been more careful to avoid seeing or depicting your comments as an insult. And I agree, its hard to tell when its the writer or the actor(or both) that is at fault. As I said before, I've had the experience of thinking an actor gave a bad performance when in fact it was probably the writing that was at fault. I have no doubt such misjudgments happen the other way around as well.

I think the hardest to spot is actually good or bad directing. In a Hollywood production, the director's role is largely that of bringing together the various other elements of the film. A great director might be working with lousy material, creating an awkward, contrived, or insultingly stupid film, and you'd have a very hard time telling who was at fault. When I try to compare the quality of different filmmakers, I always have the hardest time with directors.

Hey, look who's an asshole...
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g24/mandolian888/muffin.jpg
Yep, I'm the asshole...fantastic...

at the very least, you are adorable...

Ralph Fiennes, Ben Kingsley, Ian McKellen, Derek Jacobi, Paul Scofield, John Gielgud, Jack Lemmon, Jack Nicholson, Gary Oldman, Robert Downey, Jr., Val Kilmer, perhaps Patrick Stewart (other than ST:NG).

Patrick Stewart (other than ST:NG).

Are you basing that on the... Dancing scene... On that one episode? :p

Other than said episode (it wasn't Stewart, it was just the episode and the... dancing scene...), I thought he was quite good on TNG.

I just see more good acting overall than good writing. Plus there are times where an otherwise good actor does a poor job because of a lousy script (Depp in Pirates Of The Carribean 2), or where a good performance is masked by silly/poor dialog(Palpatine in Star Wars Episode 3).

Okay, really, I'm sorry, it's just getting to me. If you want to reply to someone's post, click the little "quote" in the bottom right-hand corner of the box that contains their post. It's really easy.

Writers are basically nameless, history-less nothings to audiences and critics and that makes them the easiest of targets.

"I've got nothing to do. Like a writer on a movie set."

Are you basing that on the... Dancing scene... On that one episode? :p

Other than said episode (it wasn't Stewart, it was just the episode and the... dancing scene...), I thought he was quite good on TNG.

No, just trying to mention that he's made more than just Star Trek and X-Men films and TV.

I never said you were, I was just illustrating how writers end up being basically skips that people dump all their critisism into.


And, of course, the problem couldn't be that most writing is bad?

We all know this to be true - it's not just a play-write or screen-write thing, it applies across the whole spectrum of writing, but it's only really when you have actors interpreting your work that the writer can get to blame someone else.

And - I just want to point out, writing can be 'bad' for a number of reasons. Stephen King (the classic example) or Thomas Harris can write good 'stories', but they are technically horrible writers. It isn't much of a stretch to watch a Stephen King movie (like 1408), and enjoy John Cusack's glittering onscreen performance, whilst at the same time lamenting the origin. (Although, in that case, you do have to balance how 'bad' the writing is, and how much you can blame on King).

And, of course, the problem couldn't be that most writing is bad?

We all know this to be true - it's not just a play-write or screen-write thing, it applies across the whole spectrum of writing, but it's only really when you have actors interpreting your work that the writer can get to blame someone else.

And - I just want to point out, writing can be 'bad' for a number of reasons. Stephen King (the classic example) or Thomas Harris can write good 'stories', but they are technically horrible writers. It isn't much of a stretch to watch a Stephen King movie (like 1408), and enjoy John Cusack's glittering onscreen performance, whilst at the same time lamenting the origin. (Although, in that case, you do have to balance how 'bad' the writing is, and how much you can blame on King).


i dont think its that "most writing is bad"; its that you cant put the finger of blame on "the writer" in a movie.

if the script really does suck you have to ask "why the fuck did they buy that sucky script?" and "why didnt they get it fixed up?" or, if we knew more about what happened "why did they hire a hack to rewrite a great script?" or "why does that director let his actors adlib lines?" or "whoa there are 5 writers credited on the script, what chance did it have to be good?"

movies are such a collaboration that its wrong to blame the writer for a failure (even when the script really does suck) when he has zero power to fix what is going wrong. he cant say "oh wow i didnt envision clare danes in this role, let me fix up the dialogue to fit with how she is handling the character" and have the director agree to it. the writer isnt even on the set.

if the script really does suck you have to ask "why the fuck did they buy that sucky script?" and "why didnt they get it fixed up?" or, if we knew more about what happened "why did they hire a hack to rewrite a great script?" or "why does that director let his actors adlib lines?" or "whoa there are 5 writers credited on the script, what chance did it have to be good?"

To make money of course nowadays more and more movies are being produced in the pursuit of money rather than the art of film making. Look at The Fantastic four 2 shit writing crappy acting bade directing but why was it made to make money hell they made a lot of money before it was released just by selling ad space.

In no particular order, I love the following:

Christopher Walken
John Malkovich
Al Pacino & Robert De Niro (the oldies, not the most recent things)
Audrey Tatou
John Turturro
Miranda Richardson
forrest Whitaker
Matt Damon
cate Blanchet
alan rickman
natalie portman
BILL MURRAY!!!!!

To make money of course nowadays more and more movies are being produced in the pursuit of money rather than the art of film making. Look at The Fantastic four 2 shit writing crappy acting bade directing but why was it made to make money hell they made a lot of money before it was released just by selling ad space.

ya ya but why not pay for a better written script? are they incapable of discerning good writing?

And, of course, the problem couldn't be that most writing is bad?

We all know this to be true - it's not just a play-write or screen-write thing, it applies across the whole spectrum of writing, but it's only really when you have actors interpreting your work that the writer can get to blame someone else.

If most writing is "bad", I've got to wonder what you're comparing it to. "Bad" sounds like a relative concept to me. There's evidence to suggest that most writing is better than what the 'powers that be' let onto the screen - the best movies are disproportionately directed by people who were involved in the screenwriting or have another incentive to protect the writing. See the top 5 on IMDB or consider the works of Woody Allen, Ingmar Bergman, Fellini, Truffaut, Hitchcock, Kurosawa, Billy Wilder and so on.

or "whoa there are 5 writers credited on the script, what chance did it have to be good?"


Okay this is pointless trivia and whatever, but it's kind of fun and will help you determine if you're about to watch a trainwreck.

When the names of writers are connected by an "&," they are collaborators, that is, they worked together. If they are connected with an "and," the second writer was brought on to 'fix' the work of the first one. So if it's Guy Guyington & Other Guyington, they worked together on the script and were partners. If it's Dude Dudester and Fella Fellenstien and Buddy Budcap and Sucker McSuckinsuck and Willwillnot, then there have been a lot of different chefs working that stew and not together. And writers are kind of arrogant (when two writers get together and one tells the other their story the other will invariably go, "You know what you should do...") and just about always feel that the story is going the wrong way unless they wrote it. So when you get a few of them 'fixing' the work of others your chances of it being a disjointed wreck increases.

Okay this is pointless trivia and whatever, but it's kind of fun and will help you determine if you're about to watch a trainwreck.

When the names of writers are connected by an "&," they are collaborators, that is, they worked together. If they are connected with an "and," the second writer was brought on to 'fix' the work of the first one. So if it's Guy Guyington & Other Guyington, they worked together on the script and were partners. If it's Dude Dudester and Fella Fellenstien and Buddy Budcap and Sucker McSuckinsuck and Willwillnot, then there have been a lot of different chefs working that stew and not together. And writers are kind of arrogant (when two writers get together and one tells the other their story the other will invariably go, "You know what you should do...") and just about always feel that the story is going the wrong way unless they wrote it. So when you get a few of them 'fixing' the work of others your chances of it being a disjointed wreck increases.

And this may be even more pointless but due to what is known as credit arbitration, there is an incentive for each writer or writing team to change things needlessly in order to qualify for credit. So even if if your work is great and the writers they bring into rewrite think that 95% of your work doesn't need to change, there's a truckload of reasons to change 50% of it.

Okay this is pointless trivia and whatever, but it's kind of fun and will help you determine if you're about to watch a trainwreck.

When the names of writers are connected by an "&," they are collaborators, that is, they worked together. If they are connected with an "and," the second writer was brought on to 'fix' the work of the first one. So if it's Guy Guyington & Other Guyington, they worked together on the script and were partners. If it's Dude Dudester and Fella Fellenstien and Buddy Budcap and Sucker McSuckinsuck and Willwillnot, then there have been a lot of different chefs working that stew and not together. And writers are kind of arrogant (when two writers get together and one tells the other their story the other will invariably go, "You know what you should do...") and just about always feel that the story is going the wrong way unless they wrote it. So when you get a few of them 'fixing' the work of others your chances of it being a disjointed wreck increases.

now THATS good info! i hope i remember it next time i look at film credits.

now THATS good info! i hope i remember it next time i look at film credits.
It will stand out when you see writing credits with both "&" and "and".