Gleason's performance in 'Requiem' is far better
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Hustler
jrl0726 — 12 years ago(March 14, 2014 07:29 PM)
Gleason got all the high praise in this film too early. It was before his far superior role in the great "Requiem For a Heavyweight" (1962). In that magnificent Serling inspired film all four (Quinn,Gleason,Harris,Rooney) of the main performances were brilliant. That was the performance he should have got nominated for, not this one. His role in this one was tiny in comparison.
-
joshua_carpino — 12 years ago(March 21, 2014 05:39 AM)
he didn't have much screen time,but i find his performance as fats to be much more rewarding. but it's two completely different kinds of performances,and i don't blame anyone for preferring requiem. it's certainly meatier,and i do love his "go home" speech at the end.
-
scorsese-1 — 11 years ago(September 02, 2014 03:11 AM)
He is better in The Hustler. Less dialogue but spot on expressions and emotion. He is great in this and deserving of the nomination. As an addendum i think this is movie has one of the finest screenplays in movie history.
-
jrl0726 — 11 years ago(September 09, 2014 06:45 PM)
"Requiem" was a superior film with four great performances and a brilliant Rod Serling screenplay. There's no way Gleason's performance was as good in "Hustler". As I said, it was more like a cameo in comparison to his "catalyst" role in "Requiem".
-
rtw416 — 11 years ago(February 18, 2015 10:17 PM)
Gleason acted inRequiem.In the Hustler he was just playing himself.
-