MovieChat Forums > From Here to Eternity (1953) Discussion > Burt Lancaster versus Montgomery Clift

Burt Lancaster versus Montgomery Clift


Anyone else think Clift is not only better looking, but a better actor?


"When you think of garbage, think of Akeem!"

reply

Definitely Clift was the better actor of the two in this.

That's my opinion anyway.

reply

Sorry but I though this was one of Burt Lancaster's best roles. He is the ultimate tough guy and leader. He shows his real abilities during the Japanese air attack. When the pudgy corporal balks at opening up the ammunition room, First Sergeant Warden orders his men to break the door down. Great scenes at this stage of the movie.

reply

I'm with Burt, but it's a hard distinction either way.

In terms of looks, they are on the opposite ends of the spectrum of male beauty: Lancaster is big, gruff and all make while Clift is more the intellectual, classic good looks.

Acting the same way.

reply

There's no comparing the two, they are so very different. Both were such fine actors.

I admire Burt Lancaster so much as a person and an actor I could never say anyone was "better".

Clift was awesome at playing the tortured soul. He is said to have inspired James Dean and Marlon Brando.

Your question pains me.

reply

I with Burt Lancaster all the way. He projects himself on the screen with power - albeit it is always Bert Lancaster.

Montgomery Clift is ALWAYS Montgomert Clift - sort of always a dog with his tail between his legs, always a simp, and a weakling. Whiny and cowering - his entire posture displays it and it seemingly in every movie he ever played in.

While some on the salutes may have been off - everyone was turned out perfectly in uniform, except Capt Holmes whose belt buckle was not shined.

reply

There's no comparison. Clift is a much better actor in not just this movie but in general. One of the finest method actor ever, it offends me that he's forgotten in film history when inferior actors like James Dean, Robert Mitchum, Fred Astaire etc. are praised to the heavens.

One day in the year of the fox came a time remembered well...

reply

I think I found Lancaster performance much better and I find it funny how people say Clift is better in this movie. The Angle of Kerr and Lancaster is far more interesting than Clift and Dona. That romance just didnt ring true to me. Lancaster had a more complex part where he had to project toughness and vulnerability at the same time much harder than soft one note male character of Clift. Clift as a boxer is a joke. Sinatra part was showy but that in itself doesnt impress me. Lancaster owned them all as did Kerr.

reply

Lancaster thought Clift was better than he was. He had no formal training in acting and had only been working a few years, he was intimidated by Clift's talent and just wanted to be able to hold his own. He wasn't entirely happy to be nominated for an Oscar for this film, he thought Clift deserved to win and knew his nomination would split the vote and cost Clift a win.

Personally, I'm with Lancaster, I think Clift was excellent in this film and it's the best performance of his career, a full expression of his talent. Lancaster holds his own, but he doesn't do anything extraordinary.

reply

What is extraordinary about Cliff’s performance in From Here to Eternity is just how miscast he seems on paper. I’m currently reading the novel and as written Prewitt should have been played by a hard as nails tough guy, not the sensitive and soulful Clift. Yet he is astounding in the role and I cannot imagine anyone doing a better job.

That said, Lancaster is excellent in the film too, but in a role much more comfortably in his wheelhouse.

reply

I don't know about the looks but Lancaster was definitely the better actor.

reply