If you thought Sofia Coppola was bad in "Godfather III", the performance by Jagger will make you think she should have won the freaking Best Actress award. What the hell kind of accent was that supposed to be?
And do not lead us into temptation
sadly, I agree
shareI don't really think Mick is a bad actor, In fact this is the only film he's done I didn't like. He was great in Performance, which is my favourite.
shareA few years late here, but I think he's a decent actor as well. But I'm a huge, life-long Stone's fan and am very familiar with his mannerisms off screen. A lot of that translates to his early acting. He was perfect for the role in Performance. As much as people on here seem to not like Ned Kelly, I really like it.
share[deleted]
I didn't think Mick did that bad of a job in this film. You'd have to wait more than 20 years later for him to REALLY suck in Freejack.
Oh well, at least he had the whole musical career thing to fall back on.
He's not a good singer either. This movie was a joke and Jagger was even far more laughable.
The New York Rangers suck. And Sidney Crosby is a cry baby!
One of the most believable performances I have seen was Robin Williams in Moscow On The Hudson. I am sure real Russians aren't fooled, though. In this case, his accent was not genuine but the characterization was good. How many bad adventure movies have their been with laughable Russian accents? Especially when the actors show a definite Cockney accent. I think personally that unless the actor gets it down packed, it is better to just play their role in their natural accent. The audience understands that.
shareActors must have been scarce as hens teeth when they were recruiting for Ned Kelly. Jagger can't act and comes across as a girly boy in this film.
share