This week, I'm doing some homework in preparation for an upcoming podcast appearance. While it's been mercifully contained to only two films, I find myself watching certain movies only because a particular actor is in them.
This, dear friends, runs completely counter to my viewing habits.
Lately, like many of you, the only name that stands a chance of prompting me to put on my shoes and head down to the theatre is the name of the director attached. While directors are not above misfires themselves (I'm looking at you GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE), they seem to have more consistency on the whole. If I had to venture a guess, it's because they have more control over the creative process than the actors they're directing.
There was a time, back when I was a young cinemagoer, where certain actors got an automatic watch. But the more time has passed, the more crappy parts I see them do - even my favorite actors. Johnny Depp wasn't worth two hours of THE LIBERTINE. I'm all about Zooey Deschanel but you couldn't pay me enough to see YES MAN. And then there's Daniel Day-Lewis (pictured above) and the craptastic mess that was NINE.
This might mean that I'm wearing my film snob sash a little bit straighter, but it's the truth. While an actor I like, or a well-assembled cast might pique my attention, neither of them ensure my hard-earned cash and two hours of my life. Sometimes, they're just too overmatched by the silly scripts they are trying to navigate...other times they're just in it for the money.
What about you folks? Are there any actors that still get your cash no questions asked?
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Not For You
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
27 comments:
This is one of the things the podcast has helped me clarify - great actors make really bad movies, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't experience them. What I mean is that it enhances your experience for the good movies, and based on the feedback from discussions of movies I ONLY saw for the actor of the week segment, there are ALWAYS people who will like a movie.
Matt Damon is a must watch all the time... no question ...
But I get what you're saying Hatter. But most film snobs tend to forget this rule when it comes to directors. I found myself at the theatre to watch Zack Snyder's CG childrens film and even though I knew it wasn't for me it still worked and I liked it.
Kate Winslet has a new movie out? It's about what, you say? Nope. Never mind. Point me to the theater.
@ Jess... Yeah, y'all are troopers dude. Using your Diane Keaton episode as a baseline, it still confounds me that with the talent involved with TOWN & COUNTRY, nobody ever put up their hand and said "Uh...anyone else think this is shit?"
You said it - great actors make really bad movies. Often.
@ Andrew... Matt Damon eh? STUCK ON YOU, THE LEGEND OF BAGGER VANCE, ALL THE PRETTY HORSES...??
@ Nicholas... I actually thought her work in THE HOLIDAY was cute, but couldn't endure THE LIFE OF DAVID GALE just for her.
I really think there is merit in watching relatively bad movies. Any trained actor can do well in the right situation. I believe very good actors always manage to come out looking competent no matter what the situation. Watching mediocre and bad movies is IMO a great way of accessing who the more talented actors are in the industry.
Stallone, Keaton, Costner, Crowe and Guy Pearce. The rest really have to get me motivated in some way or another.
But I'll go further and say the same for directors Nolan and Snyder. That's money in the bank...their bank but they never disappoint (except for Insomnia).
Neat idea for a post!
Hmmm, initially my answer is Gerry Butler, but come to think of it, there are some movies of his I refuse to see, i.e. Gamer and a few of his older ones. Even The Ugly Truth didn't appeal to me at all and I only saw that because my friend REALLY wants to see it. So I guess the answer is no, no actor gets my cash no matter what. I do agree with Marc though, I think so far I'm willing to see anything Nolan does... he hasn't made a bad film yet.
There are actors/actresses that are enough to get me to watch, but not many current ones (not even Kate). I've seen big chunks of both Gloria Grahame and Barbara Stanwyck's films, even some of the slight ones, because they are both supremely entertaining actresses who were supplied with meaty roles. Carole Lombard and Jean Arthur had amazing comic chops, so they will be enough to sell one of their films. Among actors - Mitchum, Cary Grant, Alain Delon. I don't typically see that kind of consistency across current days actors - however, they will certainly be a strong pull (along with Kate, names like Patricia Clarkson, Emma Stone, Clooney, Koji Yakusho and others will certainly get my attention). The director's name, however, typically seals a deal (typically, though not always). Though I'm not a complete proponent of the Auteur theory, I do see the director as having the greatest influence on a film's appeal to me.
I agree with Castor in his comment about their being value in "bad" movies - they can provide a wealth of experience to you regarding issues with technique, but also in helping guide your own tastes. However, I still try to avoid them having seen enough. The bad ones will arrive naturally as part of a curiosity across many genres and styles, so I don't need to open myself to additional risk by giving up quality control...
@ Castor... When it comes to the bad films though, I always find my brain wandering towards the better things I could be doing with my time.
This is assuming that the awfulness isn't offset by fun, in which case all is well.
@ Marc... Really??? Wow dude - some of those names have made some pretty craptastic films this decade. You were on board for SWING VOTE no questions asked?
@ Ruth... I like Butler, but I think he needs to choose his scripts a bit better. More ROCKNROLLA - less BOUNTY HUNTER.
Nolan is certainly on a run lately, but I always wonder what all his newfound fans think of his INSOMNIA remake. I dig the film, but it seems to be one that a lot of people write off.
In terms of modern actors I hate to sound glum but I can't honestly think of any actor I'd watch unquestioning. Perhaps the closest to a 'no questions asked' actor I have is Tom Hanks, but as of late even that's become more skeptical. I tend to go through a lot of phases with mainstream actors. Hate their stuff for a few years, love it the next few, maybe hit a snag of mediocrity in there at points.
Personally I think everyone should approach things with a bit of that 'I may enjoy their previous work but that's no guarantee on this one.' It may not be quite as exciting a life style as OMFG WAHOO I CANT WAIT AHHHHHH, but it keeps things relatively even. Allows me to enjoy something like Iron Man 2 while many are bemoaning bloated expectations. So I feel extreme hyping and even keeling equal out in the long run.
Christian Bale.
Leonardo DiCaprio.
I will watch anything and everything.
@ Bob... I think that a lot of bad movies have some redeeming value (if anything I tend to be too merciful), and as I mentioned...they start gaining points if they take the bad and turn it into fun.
As for guiding my taste and technique, I'd rather hone that with understanding which good ones speak to me the most and why.
@ Helms... Yeah, recent hanks come part and parcel with ANGELS & DEMONS. No thanks (though I do actually enjoy THE TERMINAL).
You've just reminded me that sometimes I think a cast made up of a lot of stellar bit players can make for a better sum (ie SUNSHINE, BOOGIE NIGHTS), and that perhaps that is something worth considering when time comes to drop the loot on a ticket.
@ Sasha... Really?? Even THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK and TERMINATOR: SALVATION???
There are stars that I'll see almost no matter what. Everyone makes a clunker now and again but for the most part my favortie actors don't disappoint. Cate Blanchet and Laura Linney would be up there. As for the men George Clooney or Leo almost always spark my interest as well.
For me it usually isn't about the actors though. Like Bob said above, it's all about the director. Coens, Soderbergh (LOVED The Girlfriend Experience), Tarantino, Polanski, Nolan, etc. I know that's not the topic, but that's how it goes.
Incidentally, I'd say I've never seen DDL in anything or bad in anything. But, you know how differing our opinions were on Nine.
Of the older actors Katharine Hepburn wins because I really will see her in anything, and of modern actors I don't see myself going wrong with Helena Bonham Carter. Even if the film is less than perfect I'm always impressed with what she decides to do (and I might even add Nicole Kidman and Kate Winslet to the list because even when their stuff is awful their never really awful - to me.)
(Strangely I'd have said Leo D, but I loathed him in Inception.)
Yeah, I agree with you that good movies are certainly the preferable way to guide taste, but if you're going to be subjected to a "bad" one (ie. something that doesn't appeal to you), you might as well take advantage of it - why does it NOT speak to you? That may help you avoid more of them in the future...
And Andrew reminded me that I meant to take you to task for slamming "The Girlfriend Experience". I wouldn't label it a misfire - it's not like Soderbergh was going for wide appeal or even a target market, he was experimenting. That's not to say you give him a free ride, but I think you have to look at what he was trying to accomplish. As a study of two people selling themselves in the big bad city and at the same time losing anything distinctive and even interesting about themselves, I think it's pretty fascinating. Entertaining? Well, let's just say I'm not gonna pull it off the shelve on a regular basis...
Clint. That's it.
I recall seeing Chocolat because of Johnny Depp. But apart from that one occurrence, I don't watch a movie because of one actor.
No. Absolutely not. I love Michael Caine, but you don't see me renting Bewitched. No.
I would say DiCaprio and Depp still get my money almost everytime. Though I somehow managed to avoid The Libertine.
Actors that rarely get my cinema money: Nic Cage, Ben Stiller, Will Ferrell, Josh Hartnett
Leonardo DiCaprio. Maybe Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jesse Eisenberg, Vera Farmiga, Anne Hathaway or Marion Cotillard. But definitely Leonardo DiCaprio.
Jackie Chan, I grew up on Police Story and Project A and everything. Plus he is someone where you definitely say "I'm off to see the new Jacki Chan film"... "what's that? Who's it directed by, who gives a f***".
Having said that it was sad to see that in Rush Hour 3 after about a million broken bones and at about 50 or something he finally reached that tipping point and is having to slow down, but then you still have the comedy delivery.
(Strange that when I ask commenters "But what about...?" in relation to an actor, I get no response)
@ Andrew... Not really off topic, since I did mention that in the post, saying how that's the draw for me these days. Looks as though we're of the same mindset - except where GF EXPERIENCE is concerned.
@ Encore... I don't think Hepburn ever made a bad film, but sometimes where the older actors are concerned, I'm convinced that their flops were buried with the passage of time.
@ Bob... I actually endured a bad film last night (ANNAPOLIS), and can't say I'm much better for it. Now admitting that I watched it just feels like rolling up my sleeve to show you a bruise.
Remind me and we'll talk about EXPERIENCE at pub night on Tuesday.
@ Aiden... You go for Clint the actor, or Clint the director? I ask because they feel like two very different things these days.
@ Movienut... Taught you a lesson, did it?
@ Ripley... Here, here.
@ Courtney... So I assume you're cool with Depp's Burton collaborations? (I am, but I know many are bored of them)
@ Stevee... You have a lot of newer names on that list - I like it! Unfortunately, I think I can come up with a flop for each one. Vera for instance was in ORPHAN...did ya sit through that?
@ Apathy... Well with Chan I suppose you always know what you're in for right?
Love 'em both, but I haven't seen Invictus and I haven't seen Hereafter, but I did see Gran Torino as fast as humanly possible. Going with the actor on this one, not that he isn't one hell of a director, too.
Well much like following any sports team, you can't just be a fan when they're winning right?;)
Swing Vote wasn't as bad as other things he's done (I think his daughter's cuteness helped that movie along), but you're right most of the actors I list have made poor if not terrible films...but I like what I like and stand by it (though I try to forget that Stallone's Get Carter and Eye See You).
Dude, you've just earned yourself a ridiculous amount of cool points for admitting to loving Zooey Deschanel :)
Some of mine are guilty pleasure and a teeeeny bit embarassing: Zooey, Reese Witherspoon, Paul Schneider, Paul Dano, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Kate Winslet, Kate Hudson, Casey Affleck... I tend to go for more indie-ish people.
@ Aiden... Clint the actor...interesting. Actually, I think with GRAN TORINO Clint sort of unofficially retired (anyone know anything about that?). As for Clint the director, I'm with ya. I love his films, especially what he brought us over the last decade.
@ Marc... You're a trooper man. Kinda makes me want to track down the Russell Crowe movies I've missed since I stopped following his every move.
@ Emma... See, that's actually a great little starting line-up you've named, and I could see wanting to see most of their movies (Seymour-Hoffman especially).
As for Zooey, I make no apologies - I dig her. I have since I first saw her in ALMOST FAMOUS and she looked out from that screen on to me in the audience and said "One day, you'll be cool". (In an odd twist, I'm still waiting to get cool).
My Zooey love has stepped up a bit in recent years with her work in She & Him.
Good point, Hatter sometimes the bad films of the legends do get buried, but she does have some awful films (Christopher Strong, Quality Street) but they're interesting to watch to see her talent in the making or whatnot.
Post a Comment