MovieChat Forums > Actors and Actresses > It's not the actor that is any good, its...

It's not the actor that is any good, its the role and movie they are in

posted 7 years ago by kurt7825
14 replies | jump to latest

i hate all these famous actors and actresses like Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence who are no better than anyone else but get roles in movies that lead to oscar nominations and awards

seriously, studios like to build a select few up so that for future movie releases, seeing their names attached to a movie means more profit

i can prove its not the actor and its just the role.

put Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence in a new F13, SAW, or any lower budget horror or B movie and see how many oscars they win based on their "extraordinary" acting talent. it will be zero

i wish hollywood would give other actors and actresses a chance to be in better movies instead of the same ones we always get

Ben-Hur2016 10/10 BvS Ultimate Edition10/10 Ghostbusters (2016)9/10

[–] Clusium 7 years ago

I find that it depends upon the role that they are given in. In Titanic, DiCaprio was alright, but, in J. Edgar, he was really good.

I am Judge! Jury! and Executioner!

[–] kurt7825 7 years ago

that is true but i believe most actors could have done equally as well if they were just given a chance

Ben-Hur2016 10/10 BvS Ultimate Edition10/10 Ghostbusters (2016)9/10

[–] poem 7 years ago

You're wrong.

Actors can be good for two reasons:

- They have been specifically chosen for the respective part, even if they are in general not that great actors. Examples are Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker for the original Star Wars triology, or Keanu Reeves as Neo in The Matrix.

- They are generall skilled. Then they can shine even in bad parts in bad movies. Robert de Niro for example easily pulled this off.

---
A gentleman will not insult me, and no man not a gentleman can insult me.

[–] ZFox00 7 years ago

Not necessarily. There are characters that are "better" than others. However what makes a performance is the choices the actor makes. How they express the character, the depth of the character, and truthful they are.

Gary Oldam is a shinning example of an excellent actor in some questionable movies. His performance is still good though because of his choices.

Inspiration and skill is what leads to a good performance.

[–] The_Matrixfan 7 years ago

A good actor will always shine, even in a weak role. While a bad actor is limited by the weak role.

Take Amy Adams in Nocturnal Animals. Horrible role, but she's fantastic in it because she found enough empathy for the character to be convincing. A lesser actress wouldn't have pulled it off.

Emily Blunt in Sicario had a very poor character but she her acting came through and she was great in that film.

But someone like Eliza Dushku who was given the role every actor would kill for in Dollhouse, didn't have the range to convince us she was all of those people Echo was supposed to encompass.

Good actors aren't deterred by poor roles.

A drunk man's words are a sober man's thoughts.

[–] kurt7825 7 years ago

lots of actors could have played those roles though

"I don't trust anything that bleeds for 7 days and doesn't die"

[–] kurt7825 7 years ago

well i'll watch the oscars and see if any actors from the horror genre win best actor. i doubt it will happen

"I don't trust anything that bleeds for 7 days and doesn't die"

[–] Deluge69-663-991830 7 years ago

Casting is always crucial.

You can be the greatest actor ever, but if you are not properly cast . . .