Worst "Accomplished" Actor?

By -
Donald Sutherland? What does he ever do but semi-mumble in that exact same Donald Sutherland voice? That's acting?! To appear as the exact same person every time you get on screen?

Comments

  1. Anonymous6:49 AM

    He is often given the indifferent person style performance for many scenes.

    In Nicholas Roeg's Don't Look Now, he is studying church architecture while completely butt naked. An Italian housekeeper arrives into his room, and he swings towards her, shocked.

    He moves to cover his crotch, but seeing that the lady has already seen his junk, he doesn't bother and goes back to his relaxed pose and turns back to his studies.

    Like I said, quite indifferent sort of person he plays.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Josiah Neeley9:15 AM

    "That's acting?! To appear as the exact same person every time you get on screen?"

    This describes most of the big name American actors, I think. Jack Nicholson always plays himself. Ditto De Niro. Pachino, same thing. Maybe that wasn't true before they got big (then again, maybe not).

    Honestly someone like Brad Pitt or Leonardo DiCaprio has a lot more range.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob Murphy3:28 PM

    Edward, at first I was offended and was going to point you to Dog Day Afternoon, Scent of a Woman, And Justice for All, and Sea of Love, and then ask you to tell me Pacino plays the same guy in all of them.

    But then I realized you were referring to "Pachino," with whom I am unfamiliar.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thomas L. Knapp3:02 PM

    You're blaspheming again. I don't have to work with a blasphemer.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more