One of the worst actors ever!
-
ukmoviefreak — 14 years ago(January 04, 2012 12:35 PM)
Many actors do tend to coast from film to film offering little more than a version of themselves.
As avid movie goers,we have the tendency to become fond of certain actors more from the perspective of enjoying 'watching' them rather than expecting a performance from them. Many of the BIG stars like De Niro, Pacino, Cruise and Sandra have their shining moments and then some that are less so.
I think that the 'average Joe' critic would be well served to remember this and accept film for exactly what it is - escapism.
I've loved Di Nero in 'Cape Fear' to name but one, Cruise in 'Rainman', and Pacino in 'Scent Of A Woman' and Sandra Bullock in everything that she has been in, because I accept that I think that she's gorgeous and would happily watch her every night if she read the news!
Horrible actor/actress?
Give it a gotry acting in front of the mirror sometimeit's not as easy as it looks!
Here endeth the lesson
UK Movie Freak -
lukejbarnett2002 — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 09:12 AM)
you're wrong about this. Tom Cruise almost always impresses with his performances as does Robert De Niro. it's acting, which is an art form and something that requires, skills, abilities, and talents to pull off. real actors, actors who can elevate what's on the script act their parts, they don't just offer little more than a version of themselves.
-
MitchConnor24 — 13 years ago(October 12, 2012 03:24 PM)
Yes but Bogart, Wayne, Gable and Crawford etc did have charisma and screen presence to go with it. I don't mind Bullock as a person, but as an actress she's hardly comparable to the aforementioned. She's done well for herself, and has made some films that are fun and enjoyable; but in no way does that equate to her being a good actress. I wouldn't say she's a particularly bad actress, but I wouldn't call her a good actress either.
-
marcos_ho — 14 years ago(April 21, 2011 01:38 PM)
who thinks Sandra Bullock is the most overrated actors ever!!??
She is not overrated for the simple reason that noone ever rated her that high. Even for "The Blind side", noone said she was that great. The compliments came from the industry, from people who gave her the Oscar so doesn't count. -
edalis98 — 14 years ago(April 27, 2011 10:45 AM)
The compliments came from the industry, from people who gave her the Oscar so doesn't count.
Why doesn't it count??? I don't always agree with the Academy but they are also people. I happen to agree that she did an amazing job. Was she the best that year? Well I didn't see all the other actresses in competition so I can't say but to say she is one of the worst actors ever is a stretch. Wether people like her or not is a matter of opinion as art is subjective. -
marcos_ho — 14 years ago(April 27, 2011 10:59 AM)
Yes, the Academy is made of people. But it is the same people who start gay rumours, adultery rumours, that will do anything to make or destroy someone's career. I agree, Bullock isn't one of the worst but she is nothing special.
art is subjective
If an argument can be used to defend the worst example, it is not a strong argument. What if I said that Paris Hilton did an amazing job in something something (obviously, I haven't watched her in anything)? Or that Ke$ha or the Jonas brothers are great artists? Subjectivity is a part of art but there are limits though. You can always insert more objective criteria to judge. -
edalis98 — 14 years ago(May 20, 2011 08:35 PM)
But it is the same people who start gay rumours, adultery rumours, that will do anything to make or destroy someone's career.
Sorry, but that's an assumption.
And The blind side was very successful at the box office and also had some critics su111cpport.
If an argument can be used to defend the worst example, it is not a strong argument. What if I said that Paris Hilton did an amazing job in something something
Well believe it or not even SHE has fans who think highly of her.
Or that Ke$ha or the Jonas brothers are great artists?
Again both of which also have fans who spend money on their music, maybe not on the level of Justin Bieber but still.
You can always insert more objective criteria to judge.
When it comes to entertaintment, there is hardly a general consensus. -
marcos_ho — 14 years ago(May 21, 2011 12:07 AM)
-
edalis98 — 14 years ago(May 22, 2011 03:52 PM)
^I'm not sure what argument you are refering too, but in Sandra's case she has both mass appeal and winning an academy award means that she has support from her peers. This is regardless on whoever doesn't think she deserves her oscar.
-
Donnatella — 4 years ago(January 26, 2022 03:26 PM)
But it is the same people who start gay rumours, adultery rumours, that will do anything to make or destroy someone's career.
I'm grateful that Tom Cruise had gay sex. If he hadn't made that sacrifice(s), the world wouldn't have all his beautiful movies to cherish. And whatever charity contributions Tom used his celebrity for. -
ShizaMinelli — 14 years ago(January 12, 2012 02:40 PM)
Well, in all fairness, PH was serviceable in House of Wax, and I'll easily say "Stars Are Blind" would have been a hit had it been by just about anyone else
When you're 17 a cow can seem dangerous and forbiddenam I alone here? -
marcos_ho — 14 years ago(January 12, 2012 02:54 PM)
I haven't watched House of wax and hadn't listened or watched Stars are Blind before. I just watched the latter on youtube and I am not sure. The music is indeed catchy, quite enjoyable I may add, but the lyrics are simply ridiculous:
http://www.lyriczz.com/lyrics/paris-hilton/21633-stars-are-blind/
Most lyrics are ridiculous nowadays, I admit, so I don't know. -
ShizaMinelli — 14 years ago(January 12, 2012 07:12 PM)
It was a dispos5b4able summer single that, imo, should have performed as such. And I actually recommend HoW if you enjoy horror, it's pretty fun and massively underrated. I'm not a huge PH fan ftr, just very objective lol
When you're 17 a cow can seem dangerous and forbiddenam I alone here? -
CCRider01 — 14 years ago(June 26, 2011 05:37 PM)
IMO, Sandra Bullock is a good actress, but not a great one. In some ways she is like the male Tom Cruise, in that most of their films are very entertaining but they are more movie stars with wide appeal than actors with great chops. Though Cruise has given some excellent performances and is a better actor than Bullock, and has had more iconic roles (Rain Man and Jerry Maguire for example). Oddly though, even though Cruise started 6 years earlier than Bullock (was a superstar at least a decade before her), and in his prime was far more "bankable", he has made 9 less films than Sandra (37 vs 46).
Regarding Sandra Bullocks Oscar win, it had the Julia Roberts / Erin Brockovich touch written all over it.- Both actresses were considered Americas Sweethearts.
- Both actreses had given a string of good (not spectacular) performances.
- Both actresses were/are very well liked within the industry
- Both Oscars were given as much for the body of their work, and their longevity in a male dominated industry, as much as for the roles themselves (Erin Brockovich and Blind Side).
- Both years (2000 and 2009) were not the strongest for GREAT nominated female performances, though Roberts had stiffer competition with Joan Allen in "The Contender" and Ellen Burstyn in "Requiem for a Dream".
