I am sorry was that a question?

Hence the question mark, Mark.

Crazy Eight wrote:

I am sorry was that a question?

Hence the question mark, Mark.

Well you have picked up talli's beliefs and theories on acting.. nothing wrong with it just is what it is.

Bardem definitley didn't need to transform at all. But his characterization isn't as shallow as you guys are implying.

Actor's performance lies on body movements - how the actor evokes emotion through his actions. And with Javier Bardem, with his stoic visage, he employs a zero empathy Anton Chigurh with those steady and calm yet sinister posture. That's great acting, effective acting, disturbing acting. Hence, a great performance.

I wonder if talli play Anton Chigurh, will Anton be as sadistic and frightening as Javier did?

Yeah, It really doesn't take a whole lot of acting chops to be emotionless. But it takes a whole lot of acting chops to be a convincing emotionless character. His PERFORMANCE is that powerful!!!

Ok. Where's the guillotine? :modesty:

hoppity-kick wrote:Actor's performance lies on body movements - how the actor evokes emotion through his actions. And with Javier Bardem, with his stoic visage, he employs a zero empathy Anton Chigurh with those steady and calm yet sinister posture. That's great acting, effective acting, disturbing acting. Hence, a great performance.

I wonder if talli play Anton Chigurh, will Anton be as sadistic and frightening as Javier did?

Yeah, It really doesn't take a whole lot of acting chops to be emotionless. But it takes a whole lot of acting chops to be a convincing emotionless character. His PERFORMANCE is that powerful!!!

Ok. Where's the guillotine? :modesty:

so you're arguing that Javier was good at not being realistic-human like? oh ok....you do realize that most people gravitate to being unrealistic, unhuman when they try to act


how many times have you seen an actor walk in a weird way on stage? completely unnatural? they can't help it.....here Javier is doing it in a different context....and in this context, you understand it as being creepy or scary or whatever you may call it....but he is not doing good acting. Its the illusion


you dont have to be a good actor to play creepy/scary


whatever...moving on

Okay. Label me convinced. Label me sarcastic Let's just move on.

no order

Ryan Reynolds - Buried
Marlon Brando - On The Waterfront
Orson Welles - Citizen Kane
Nicholas Cage - Adaptation
Adrien Brody - The Pianist
Tobey Maguire - Brothers
Jude Law - Road to Perdition
Jack Nicholson - Chinatown
Jack Nicholson - One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest
Robert DeNiro - Taxi Driver

Paul Newman in The Hustler
Sam Rockwell in Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
Melanie Laurent in Inglourious Basterds
Julianne Moore in Magnolia
Dustin Hoffman in Lenny
Kenneth Branagh in Hamlet
Anna Karina in Band of Outsiders
Ray Liotta in Goodfellas
Pam Grier in Jackie Brown
Humphrey Bogart in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

Fry wrote: Melanie Laurent in Inglourious Basterds

Truly a wonderful performance!

IWatchFilmsNotMovies wrote:

talli wrote:there's no definitive way to play a character...its all choices...a choice that either the director requests or the actors decides upon, or they agree upon...but nonetheless it still doesnt require any acting skill....so its not a good acting performance....its a great character...but not a performance.....that character could have been acting by anymore with an ugly face with zero effort

Anyway (in no particular order):
Tom Hanks - Forrest Gump
Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
Jack Nicholson - Chinatown/One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
George C. Scott - Dr. Strangelove/Patton
Christian Bale - The Fighter
Djimon Hounsou - Blood Diamond
Al Pacino - The Godfather (Part 1, 2 and 3 are all awesome)
Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Daniel Day Lewis - There Will Be Blood
Morgan Freeman - The Shawshank Redemption