MovieChat Forums > That Guy... Who Was in That Thing (2012) Discussion > Did Bruce Davison really belong on this ...

Did Bruce Davison really belong on this list?

posted 11 years ago by denise1234
16 replies | jump to latest

I don't think Mr. Davison is as much of an unknown/known as the other actors portrayed?

True that he has become *more* of a character actor in later years, but he was the lead male role in such films as 'Willard', 'The Strawberry Statement', 'Summer of My German Solider', 'The Lathe of Heaven', 'Short Eyes', 'The Wave', etc.

I realize that he is probably more known in his lead roles to people of my generation and/or love of cinema, but I really don't think he should have been included with the other folks interviewed in this film.

However, that being said, I thoroughly enjoyed watching him and hearing his stories.

"I'm here because I believe in a free Narnia."

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] denise1234 11 years ago

In the latter part of his career he has, but he was a lead in the first part of his career whether some folks are old enough to know that or not, and unlike most if not all of the other actors portrayed in this film.

But, as I said, I always enjoy watching Bruce Davison.

"I'm here because I believe in a free Narnia."

[–] kermitu 11 years ago

Bruce Davison is perfect for this film. I doubt many folks know him by name unless they are huge movie people, this makes him perfect for the title "that guy who was in that thing"

[–] DarrenDirt 10 years ago

Agreed!

I recently saw scenes from Lathe of Heaven and was impressed by his performance, but before that I only knew him from minor/supporting roles, often as an antogonist who "keeps the story moving" as was mentioned in various ways in the documentary.

Really glad I watched it, was a fascinating topic and the director picked the perfect mix of actors -- I hope the acting industry as a whole gets more things like this "out there", give the Average Jo audience member some awareness of how extremely unbalanced it is when it comes to "stars" versus "the other guys/gals". And then maybe they would tone down the fanaticism and discourage the ridiculous paparazzi addiction as a whole... One can hope, right?

- - -

Chipping away at a mountain of pop culture trivia,
Darren Dirt.

[–] dgates64 11 years ago

I agree for the most part. He was the only person in the movie whose name I actually knew.

[–] hpankin 11 years ago

I agree but not because he's had lead roles before, and not because he's probably the "best known" of this bunch...

It's because he was nominated for an Oscar. As a working actor, once you ascend to the point that you're nominated for the highest honor by your peers, you are in a different category altogether.

Of course, getting to that point does in no way guarantee continued success. Nor does winning an Oscar; see Cuba Gooding Jr's post-Oscar filmography.

[–] silverfish-1 11 years ago

I don't think him or Paul Guilfoyle (who I also knew) are really unknowns. But - the whole point of the show was to have people whose faces you recognize, but you don't know their names. Also, both of those guys are not leads, and they play many (perhaps more) supporting roles than they play heavies.

Plus, it helped to have Davidson because otherwise you are stuck with an entire documentary of lesser known people and I think it helped to have him there to maintain interest.

Raised or lowered? Anyone, anyone? Raised.

[–] Michael-Keating 11 years ago

You're right. There could have been other lesser-known actors than him to have replaced him for this documentary. That's just my thought.

Incidentally, I recognized several others by name like Zelko Ivanek, Timothy Omundson, Xander Berkeley, Paul Guilfoyle, and Stanley Kamel from past TV shows (i.e. 24, Monk, Psych, CSI, True Blood). . . Maybe I have an eye for those actors.

[–] Thebobo. 11 years ago

I kept thinking the same thing! He was overqualified for this documentary.
http://www.youtube.com/user/themisfitsmessiah?feature=mhee

[–] the_frog_princess 11 years ago

I thought he was just fine for the movie, which presented a large cross section of the sorts of actors you find in supporting actor roles whose faces you recognize but not necessarily their names. Yes, he played leads initially, but he had a much longer career NOT playing leads and experienced the same dry spells DURING his career as the other actors in this movie did. There's a myth that once you hit the screen in a major film or TV show you've "arrived" and that making ends meet (unless you are a druggie or just tremendously foolish with your money) ceases to be an issue.

[–] Anscules 10 years ago

Didn't have a problem with it. "Bruce Davison" on a marquee has never meant anything to the average moviegoer, not even in the year or two after Longtime Companion, because hardly anyone outside of NY/LA saw that movie. To average movie fan Joe Blow, his nomination that year was the usual "and here's the obligatory actor I've never heard of before getting a supporting nod for a film I have never heard of before..." which means nothing, except perhaps a slight uptick in home video attention from people like me.

And since I'm here, my favorite Bruce Davison role was in Last Summer... great stuff, there.

"Rampart: Squad 51."

[–] susanemccool 10 years ago

Thanks for reminding me of Longtime Companion. A terrific movie.

I've remembered ?eljko Ivanek since seeing him in The Sender. I'm surprised it got such a relatively low rating here. I see there's an earlier post on it I need to check out.

[–] mmarcopolo 10 years ago

I feel he was just there to add a little extra star power but I can think of at least a hundred or so more actors who would have been a better choice. No disrespect to Mr. Davison because he's a great lead and supporting actor.