Jump to content

Greatest Actor/Actress/Director (in your opinion)


Murph

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Even with all its deficits, the original Blade Runner was a powerful film; note that Scott needed at least three or four attempts before he actually nailed it with the Final Cut; without Producer meddling the original theatrical release might have had fewer issues, it might have made 10% more at the box office - Blade Runner made a profit not in the theaters, but through video and later DVD because people rented it over and over again an the search for the European theatrical release became a bit of an obsession for some of the fan base.

Why is Blade Runner considered "a powerful film."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It sure seems to impress most people who view it for the first time.

If it was a forgettable film, it would have been long forgotten. It wasn't very successful at the box office. But it became a scienc-fiction classic. So, yeah. Powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

It sure seems to impress most people who view it for the first time.

If it was a forgettable film, it would have been long forgotten. It wasn't very successful at the box office. But it became a scienc-fiction classic. So, yeah. Powerful.

Saw it once, long time ago. Iirc, it was about a bunch of human-looking robots trying to make it in society?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rick said:

Saw it once, long time ago. Iirc, it was about a bunch of human-looking robots trying to make it in society?

Plus some heavy-handed reflections on the human soul.

I like the visuals of the movie. The script, not so much.

Edited by sunday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sunday said:

Plus some heavy-handed reflections on the human soul.

I like the visuals of the movie. The script, not so much.

The script is iffy at times, no argument.  However, I cannot think of a movie that is more visually interesting than Blade Runner.  It's not just that it feels like a complete world but every shot seemingly has things to look at and discover.  It's so richly detailed and designed and filmed.  And it has Rutger Hauer in not just his best performance but in a performance I would say is a top 10 no matter the metrics that you measure it against.  

Edited by nitflegal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the script I think was very good. I think the guy who adapted it was Hampton Fancher, who did a number of Hollywood script projects.

I think the problem was everyone has gotten used to having everything spelt out for them. Hence the 'I am Deckard, and I am a Bladerunner, and I kill Robots etc etc etc' monalogue. There is a lot hidden in the acting, the things unsaid, the lighting, even in the sound ensemble. The whole point of the film, as with PK Dicks book, is to explore the nature of what is fundimentally human. And if you build a Robot that believes it is human, then what ultimately is the difference?

Deckard Is a Replicant, just like Rachel, just like the Replicants he kills. The only difference is he has memories, and believes, or chooses to believe, he is human. So he is.

The real tragedy of Bladerunner is that its not really complete. There was unfilmed stuff, there was an entire sequence where Holden, the Bladerunner who gets shot in the first 5 minutes, is visited by Deckard in Hospital. Never made it in, because office politics and that they ran out of budget. Its not Scotts favourite film, which is a shame, because I still think it, and Alien, are among his best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Even with all its deficits, the original Blade Runner was a powerful film; note that Scott needed at least three or four attempts before he actually nailed it with the Final Cut; without Producer meddling the original theatrical release might have had fewer issues, it might have made 10% more at the box office - Blade Runner made a profit not in the theaters, but through video and later DVD because people rented it over and over again an the search for the European theatrical release became a bit of an obsession for some of the fan base.

Yes, it was. I found it memorable after having seen it for the first time on VHS about 4 years after it was released.

I suppose there was some advantage to the meddling, it created mysteries, almost like the opaque nature of 'Hotel California', where people spent lifetimes looking for answers in the cover of the album. Much was the case with the original version of Bladerunner.. Why was Joanna Cassidy not Joanna Cassidy when she broke through the glass? Why If there are 5 Skin Jobs, did Deckard only run into 4? What the hell was the Origami Unicorn about? Its only when with the latest version that much of that has been cleared up. Its lost some of the mystery, but its a more complete film now.

Its a curious thing, I find the follow up in many ways a better film. But for some reason, considerably less interesting. And that had film has plenty of dialogue, and a 100 foot tall  Ana de Armas cavorting naked for crisakes. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of respect for all the actors mentioned in this thread. Caine was memorable in a number of roles - in particular, for me, two movies spring to mind immediately: Zulu, Get Carter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also just amazing in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.  A hilarious movie.  I actually think it is harder to do "good" comedy than most other sorts of acting, and it requires more out of an actor so it does not become satire.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. In comedy, everything must be perfect in order to work. Script/dialog, mimics, gestures, and above all. That ming thing. Timing. Add to that all the rest of a scene coordination, obviously. Miss a beat, you may still get a solid, somewhat funny scene out of it. But if you want people in stiches you can afford no mistake in the production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Murph said:

He was also just amazing in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.  A hilarious movie.  I actually think it is harder to do "good" comedy than most other sorts of acting, and it requires more out of an actor so it does not become satire.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DKTanker said:

Think Fargo and No country for Old Men are superior to Big Lebowski.  

both were amongst the best movies i´ve ever seen, but i was commenting on the timing of comical effect 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Coens certainly are among my favorite directors, even the stuff where I suspect that I'm missing a lot of context (A Serious Man, Barton Fink, The Man Who Wasn't There). And this not the least because I think that only they managed to unleash the dark potential of John Goodman as an actor who seems to have otherwise been typecast as the funny, harmless fattie in pretty much every other role in which I saw him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Caine is a great actor, he proved that In Get Carter and a dozen other movies. The problem for me is, that whilst he is always good in a movie, the vast majority of the movies he has starred in have been utter stinkers. Go and watch the Movie 'Water', and you might see what I mean.

I wont say he tainted his legacy. I will say he did it few favours.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For contemporary actors, I'll have to bring up Gary Oldman and Michael Fassbender, who both tend to vanish behind their characters. I needed a long time to even recognize Fassbender in particular, because he was a complete different person in any movie I had seen him before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While not unexpected, but this thread ignores all the great Italian, French and Swedish directors (except for Mr Leone) and actors / actresses post WW II. For example, recently I saw Le Samourai from 1967 by Melville, excellent and innovative for its time, and Le Pianiste from 2001 with Isabelle Huppert, certainly one of the best actresses of her generation. The Swedish actor Stellan Skarsgård is also a favorite, having recently seen him in a youthful role in 'Den enfaldige mördaren' from 1982. In addition, the contemporary Norwegian director Joachim Trier (Oslo, 31. august; Verdens verste menneske) made a number of great films. The Italian director Paolo Sorrentino (La grande Belleza, Le conseguenze dell'amore) is also superb.

When it comes to American directors, I am also fan of Richard Linklater, Steven Soderbergh and David Lynch. Regarding actors, one should not forget James Spader (especially in 'Sex, Lies and Videotape' from 1989). Nicolas Cage has always been a guilty pleasure of mine, sometimes he even touches greatness (Leaving Las Vegas, Wild at Heart).

Edited by Daan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Stellan Skarsgard is good in whatever he has been in.

I probably should have mentioned David Cronenberg, two of my favourite s being Existenz  and Videodrome. It's positively  scary how much of the contemporary  world he predicted with the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Michael Caine is a great actor, he proved that In Get Carter and a dozen other movies. The problem for me is, that whilst he is always good in a movie, the vast majority of the movies he has starred in have been utter stinkers. Go and watch the Movie 'Water', and you might see what I mean.

I wont say he tainted his legacy. I will say he did it few favours.

Hell, he did a Jaws sequel.  Though to be fair to him, he has stated he did it because it became a paid vacation to the Bahamas during the winter. . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Daan said:

While not unexpected, but this thread ignores all the great Italian, French and Swedish directors (except for Mr Leone) and actors / actresses post WW II. For example, recently I saw Le Samourai from 1967 by Melville, excellent and innovative for its time, and Le Pianiste from 2001 with Isabelle Huppert, certainly one of the best actresses of her generation. The Swedish actor Stellan Skarsgård is also a favorite, having recently seen him in a youthful role in 'Den enfaldige mördaren' from 1982. In addition, the contemporary Norwegian director Joachim Trier (Oslo, 31. august; Verdens verste menneske) made a number of great films. The Italian director Paolo Sorrentino (La grande Belleza, Le conseguenze dell'amore) is also superb.

When it comes to American directors, I am also fan of Richard Linklater, Steven Soderbergh and David Lynch. Regarding actors, one should not forget James Spader (especially in 'Sex, Lies and Videotape' from 1989). Nicolas Cage has always been a guilty pleasure of mine, sometimes he even touches greatness (Leaving Las Vegas, Wild at Heart).

You touch on something that I was thinking after one of Stuart's posts; how many English (and by extension foreign in general) actors and actresses have most of us in the USA never seen on screen.  I mean over the years I've stumbled upon brilliant performances of various absolutely stunning actresses who looked familiar and then realized I'd seen them in Hammer films which seemed the main English films to hit the US TV and VHS markets.  Same with Italian (only horror and Felini were ever somewhat prevalent) and French?  Hell, I've seen many fantastic Spanish movies but only because my wife has a major in Spanish literature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...