I can't tell bad actors from good actors in movies

Page 1 of 3 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

paulsinnerchild
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,111

02 Mar 2007, 10:59 pm

I find it so difficult to read the actors's emotions, my ability of telling a bad actor apart from a good actor are really hard when I am watching a movie, so bad acting really has never bothered me like it bothers most people. Even today I really bad at judging acting skills. I may have seen a movie and told everyone “that was a great movie I saw last night” and everyone replied “yeah, but the acting was dreadful (and other words I dare not mention), that so and so can’t act and go on… ”. I would just have to their word for it because I would have absolutely no idea. That may be good in my eyes, because if you are totally blind to bad acting that would make some movies that look really lousy in most people’s eyes look terrific in mine.



matt271
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 982
Location: Australia

03 Mar 2007, 12:54 am

ppl like to say some actors r bad actors. what happens is it becomes common for a group of people to like/dislike the same actors. like tom crues; he does some pretty idiotic stuff on tv, and now people think hes a bad actor. its just so they can talk about him, saying they are a better person them him, and he is famous. its like saying "i could do what he does. i am as good as him. i could do it better. i am better them him" about some guy on tv. people do it to make themselves feel good, because they idolize people on tv. also NTs tend to like to conform to the group. i remember talking w/ my friends about a movie, and we all liked it. then later 1 of my friends who we where talking about it with asked me to burn the movie for him. i asked "wtf?" and he said "i didn't want to feel left out" that was very weird i thought, but i was nice and burnt him the movie.
so yeah, there is a big social factor to movies i was unaware of until this incident. i myself only find acting bad when the actors act like they don't remember what just happened in the last scene. also if the actors talk like they are gay, i find that annoying too.



Quest_techie
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 380

03 Mar 2007, 12:57 am

you have to look at an actors full range to know how good or bad they are, if someone is truly brilliant in their first performance that could be them being truly brilliant, or that could be them playing themself with different words

determinging aif someone acts well or not is difficult, and 90% of peopl ewho are in mainstream studio films are utter dreg, so it makes it harder.



Go_lightly
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 78

03 Mar 2007, 7:58 am

Watch something with "the Olsen twins" or "Sabrina the teenage witch" and then see a movie like "Capote" or
"Walk the line".



rabbit23
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 77
Location: london, england

03 Mar 2007, 8:22 am

I think this could very well be a case of the emperor having no clothes....



ZanneMarie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,324

03 Mar 2007, 9:36 am

Here's the deal with acting. Good actors transcend the character so they become that person. A really good actor is so good at this that you don't recognize that they were in other movies you may have seen. That is when they disappear into the role, so the actual actor is left completely behind. You rarely see this in mainstream movies.

Bad actors are the actors where you are always aware of the "actor." That is Tom Cruise playing so and so. If you are always aware that it is Tom Cruise playing the part, the transcendence is lost and it is bad acting. If he disappears into the character as he did in Born on the Fourth of July, that is good acting. Of course fame and choosing similar roles also does good acting in even with good actors. A really famous actor must pick very different roles to still appear a good actor (Jack Nicholson has a tendancy to do this and usually successful when he does).


Hope that helps you distinguish. By the way, the general public does not recognize that is what good acting is. That's the result of classes in film.

Zanne



9CatMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,403

03 Mar 2007, 10:01 am

I agree with the above. Good actors are understated. Bad actors are "over the top." You are painfully aware of their acting. You want to run out of the theater or, if you are at home, stop the video or DVD you're watching and return it to the store promptly.



Graelwyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,601
Location: Hants, Uk

03 Mar 2007, 10:03 am

Have no issues with this... if I can totally believe that person is real, and I am immersed in the story rather than sitting thinking, 'God, that looks so fake, couldn't they do that better?'', I pretty much consider the actor to be reasonable, but then I did drama as a child and indeed as an adult to some degree and have grown up being taken to the theatre and being shown films because my mother has a massive interest in these things.


_________________
I am diagnosed as a human being.


9CatMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,403

03 Mar 2007, 10:07 am

I must have AS if I notice this, but in the movie Four Minutes, the actor who played Roger Bannister was an almost complete match, except that he was two inches shorter than the real Roger Bannister. The actors who played Bannister's friends, Chris Brasher and Chris Chataway, were exact lookalikes. They were runners as well. Drew Carnwath (Brasher) competed in a marathon.



larsenjw92286
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,062
Location: Seattle, Washington

03 Mar 2007, 11:25 am

I think it has something to do with the fact that some actors have a dry sense of humor.


_________________
Jason Larsen
[email protected]


Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,674
Location: Calgary

03 Mar 2007, 11:29 am

I've read that introverts/aspies would have an acting advantage. They have acted their whole life, no training.



larsenjw92286
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,062
Location: Seattle, Washington

03 Mar 2007, 11:32 am

Is that because their way of understanding things is different?


_________________
Jason Larsen
[email protected]


KurtmanJP
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 690
Location: Ramona, California

03 Mar 2007, 11:35 am

Corvus wrote:
I've read that introverts/aspies would have an acting advantage. They have acted their whole life, no training.


But what about the parts where they have to show intense emotion in a flick?


_________________
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
- Hunter S. Thompson


larsenjw92286
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,062
Location: Seattle, Washington

03 Mar 2007, 11:36 am

That's a good question!


_________________
Jason Larsen
[email protected]


9CatMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,403

03 Mar 2007, 11:38 am

This would be another of those Random Facts Nobody Needs to Know, but Roger Bannister did some acting at Oxford. He had some AS traits and was very shy, but could get into character very well. I think it probably helped him a lot.