Or is Vince Gilligan just that good of a producer etc.?
Cause I loved Breaking Bad, but I have seen Cranston in Drive, The Infiltrator, and now this, and wasn't particularly impressed by him.
I thought Sneaky Pete was a terrific show, but he was actually the weakest link in my opinion.
So, main question I have is, what was it about his portrayal of Walter White that compelled people to say he's a Great Actor? (even Anthony Hopkins wrote him a fan letter)
I think Cranston wanted to play a gangster, so he produced a show that would allow him to do just that. I thought he could have pulled it off too if the writing, (those TERRIBLE monologues!) were better. A vanity project, but ultimately his character was an idiot even though we're supposed to fear him, and never once did we feel he got the better of our "heroes". I won't let this forgettable turd tarnish my opinion of him.
share^ this x 1000000!
I'm not going to let his worst performance define his talent. Breaking Bad and his episode in the X-Files tells me all I need to know about his skill level. He IS a great actor. This was just a terrible role (and series).
"She hasn't even read the books..." - Elliot_Alderson
disagree wholeheartedly,
best part of the show, his monologues were great,
and his character had the most integrity of anyone in the show
Lee's Daniel's' THe Butler'
Srsly I watched this show because he's in it.
But, yeah, you know what it is.
I did it for me. I liked it. I was good at it. And I was really... I was alive.
He's a resourceful and versatile character actor. I have yet to see him give a bad performance.
shareTrue, but also I've not yet seen him earn all the praise he got for Walter White. It's mostly hype because the character was cool, not because he actually pulled off "a normal guy going evil".
shareI have never seen Cranston in anything but this and Breaking Bad, and of course his Walter White was genius.
When Breaking Bad was airing I had a colleague that was constantly talking about how good Cranston was because she was a fan of Malcolm in the Middle, and would say it was amazing how he good he was at both parts, especially as BB got progressively darker. If that is the case, then he must have an impressive range.
I do think there are some actors that can absolutely own a part a to perfection, but they are surprisingly limited in range. James Gandolfini (may he rest well)immediately comes to mind. Tony Soprano was brilliant, but I have seen the actor in other productions and really marveled at how underwhelming or awkward he was. His role in All The King’s Men was a major disappointment to me. I was thrilled when I found out he was cast in that movie, but he just seemed like he did not belong on that screen.
I have to agree about Gandolfini.
I never thought he was. He's a good TV actor, but he never truly pulled off "breaking bad" to me. I just didn't buy him doing all the evil things in that show, and Cranston playing him with a constant smirk didn't help things.
Still, Breaking Bad is my favourite show ever, but not because of Cranston. Gilligan and the other writers simply hit it out the park, and Cranston was OK in the role, he just doesn't deserve the level of praise he got.
At worst, Cranston is a solid actor.
Anyone who can go from Dr. Tim Whatley in Seinfeld to Hal in Malcolm in the Middle to Walter White on Breaking Bad has range/talent.
Is it a great actor? Eh... that I don't know. Define "great". Are we talking top 10, top 25, top 100?
You should watch Malcolm in the Middle and then the alternate ending of Breaking Bad. Cranston is quite easily one of the best actors from these modern days.
shareTotally disagree.
He did a great job and IMO is a fine actor.
I really do not think that there were any weak links in the show at all.
"I care about the law. It's justice I don't give a toss about." Cleaver Greene