One of the worst actors ever!
-
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".
-
sita_chez — 13 years ago(August 12, 2012 01:38 PM)
ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND???
Bitch please they where both amazing movies, and both actresses deserved their oscars without question without doubt.
Yes Sandy is Americas Sweetheart, but neither oscar was given out based on their body of work, are ya nuts? if that were the case Meryl Streep would win everytime she was nominated EVERYTIME!!!! are you kidding me its Meryl Streep. Sandy's performance in the Blind Side truely showed off her acting abilities, she was amazing in it, as was Julia Roberts in Erin Brockovich both women justly won their oscars as their performances rightly earned them the win. I always watch the oscars and was actually unaware of this film until Sandy won, i DL'd it right after and watched straight away and was blown away by this young mans story (my fave bit in the movies is the scene on the football field were she tells him how to play and protect the other players like they're members of their family).
Sandy has had many great movies
speed
the net
a time to kill
28 days
practical magic
miss congeniality
premonition
the blind side
the two most amazing that really show off her acting skills are "a time to kill" and "the blind side" great movies and well deserved oscar win
"beep me gently with a chainsaw" Heathers -
lukejbarnett2002 — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 09:32 AM)
ok, there's no way Tom Cruise has made only 37 movies, no way, I will never believe that. he's the most famous of all the actors of his generation and he's been around seemingly forever now and Bruce Willis had made 40 movies by around 1997, and Bruce Willis has only been around since probably the late '70s or early '80s. you lost me and made no sense at all when you compared Sandra bullock to tom cruise. that was the most absurd and the worst and most illogical comparison ever made. and say that tom cruise is not known for his acting chops? uh, yeah right. what does it take to have 238acting chops to you? do you have to get all grimy and psychologically messed up and too into your part by eating a cockroach like Nicolas cage in kiss of the vampire or by taking a drug to get into character like johnny depp did in preparation for his role in fear and loathing in las vegas?
-
FilmFan777 — 14 years ago(May 14, 2011 10:09 PM)
How about this Range. Most of what you see her in has a comedic flare to it. Straight comedy, or playing straight being comedic.
When she's done drama such as 'Crash' which she 'nailed', and 'The Blind Side', she really stands out. However most of what she does is within the same vein so to speak, so you don't see such extremes in her work as you might with others.
And this Entertainer. When she's on screen, she 'Entertains' people to delight. She's natural, impeccable timing, has a charismatic styling that draws people to watch her every move. Something you 'cannot' say about 'many' actors our there. Whatever she's in, be it even, 'eh', she stands out from the material and that says loads.
Success her films for the most part have done Very good box office, especially for the 'type' of films they are. She's not doing 'Transformers' type buster's yet the films she has done, exceptional again, for they're type.
Likeability factor There's a 'Charm' Sandra has that has captured film goers for, near 20 years now. She lights up a screen and brings life to a scene. Women adore her like she's the sister/friend you'd want around. Guys find her cute, pretty, attractive yet still can be 'one of the guys'.
Difference When you think about it, there aren't really female actors you can lump her together with. She's a stand out with her own style. There's dozens of other female actors out there that are interchangeable and can get lost amongst themselves. Sarah has a 'unique' styling which she brings that sets her apart from others. And she has capitalized on that to extreme success.
You may not like her may think she's only 3 sides of a 6 sided talent box may not like the films she does or how she does them. Yet for every role I've seen her in, self tailored or not, she brings an entertainment factor that adds strength to the story, even when the story is weak.
