MovieChat Forums > Party Monster (2003) Discussion > Macaulay Culkin's acting.

Macaulay Culkin's acting.


What did everyone think of Culkin's acting in Party Monster?

reply

I posted this in another thread, but I think it really belongs here. Anyway, I thought Culkin did a pretty accurate job simply because I never thought the real Alig had much personality to begin with. I never really knew why people wanted to be around him except for the fact that he could get them drugs. Looking back on it, he was kind of awkward. His style was incredibly crappy compared to some of his peers (i.e. Leigh Bowery was freakin' amazing). Not to mention that he just reminded me of the kid at the birthday party who was only there because your parents made you invite him.

reply

I thought Seth and Culkin were both perfect in their roles. They did a good job imo. The only actor I didn't like was Chloe Seveigny....I thought she was hopeless, or maybe it was just that her role didn't have much to bite into in the first place.

reply

His acting was surprisingly good. However, he was also probably just playing himself. He's had some run ins with the law with pain killers.

reply

Sorry Jez, you're wrong. DJ'ing @ Limelight in those days and being around Alig a bit, Mac got it as close to right as one can do if you're imitating a real person. He got Alig's mannerism's down well as well as his insecurities and overall shallow nature. As far as Alig's own reaction, for starters he hasn't seen the film. Two, and maybe most importantly, no human being sees themselves as others see them. No knock on Alig (or anyone else) that's just simply the case.

"Religion is the opiate of the people" - Karl Marx

reply

I understand the concept that he was acting poorly on purpose, to try to emulate a person whose persona is largely an act or a way to get attention. Culkin was too experienced to have been a bad actor unintentionally.

But even with people like that, once they are alone their real, spontaneous personality comes out. I never saw that with Culkin's acting in this movie he seemed like he was acting when he was in public and the same when he was alone or with James St James and nobody else. Then again if Alig truly was a sociopath then his entire personality (other than the attention seeking behavior) was probably just an act.

I saw an interview on youtube that Alig did in 1988. He didn't have the wooden phoniness Culkin had.

reply

His acting was dreadful. You could tell he was reciting lines. He's never been a good actor. Even as a child, his lines are forced and unbelievable. In The Good Son, Elijah Wood was excellent and Culkin just paled by comparison.

reply

I thought Culkin did 'okay'.

But Seth Green was absolutely fabulous (as usual) and I think Culkin's acting probably paled a bit, in comparison to Green's.

JMHO~




"I will not go gently onto a shelf, degutted, to become a non-book." ~ Bradbury

reply

The only thing he was able to convincingly play was a drug addict (not a stretch), but his line delivery was awful.

reply

It was dreadful and terrible to watch.
I can't believe how awful this movie is.

reply

Macaulay's character in the movie COMPLETELY lacked Michael Alig's real-life charisma and over-the-top demeanor that IRL yielded Michael power & influence over others. I kept looking for it whilst watching Macaulay and never once did I see it. His character in the movie was anemic and non-magnetic and therefore never would have had the entourage, the posse nor the fan club Michael Alig did. He simply lacked "it."

reply