Sign in to follow this  

11/22/63 - massively great performances

7 posts in this topic

Maybe Baby boomers can't get enough of this subject matter (Kennedy's Assassination).

But I read the book when it came out, and this mini-series is even better.


Most of all the ACTORS - everyone's great, from the leads to each small cameo.


Antoni Corone  plays the best "Jack Ruby" ever, and his character haunts the rest of the story.

(I keep expecting him to show up in the last scenes at the Dallas Police HQ!)  


And -- James Franco.

What a hero.

We think he looks good in proper 1960's clothes----then, he's arrested, and his mug shots, after being beaten by police, look even better!

Not many actors can pull that off.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some really fun MOVIE "references" in this show:


James Franco has to explain the "witness protection" program to someone in 1963---so he describes Michael's murder of his brother Fredo on the lake in Lake Tahoe.

This is to help disguise the fact that there are no records of his life that his employer requires---

because he's a TIME-TRAVELLER!


When talking to a veteran of WW2 (in 1960), James Franco says he did 2 tours in Korea. When the man asks what division he was with, he says: "MASH, 4077th".

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately --even in the face of this glowing review--I'm adamantly and steadfastly unconvinced of the acting skills of today's stars. Feh. :wacko:

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's stars -->

the odd thing about entertainment today is that the TV-SERIES (and the "limited" TV-SERIES) are of a breadth and depth that movies, even the 1930's classics, cannot reach.

Some moments are silly but there are some GRIPPING performances in these shows.

in: 11/22/63, Josh Duhamel plays a villain that LEAPS from the tv-screen.

Many other excellent "period" characters that BREATHE 1963 America.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, I'm of the school-of-thought that, 'unless you've experienced probably can't portray it'.

I know there's a lot of different acting techniques out there (and a lot of different opinions on different acting techniques). A crony of mine insists that an actor can imagine a place or a character so adroitly that he doesn't ever actually have had to have 'been there'.

But me, I don't cotton to this. You can't prove this by me. I lean conservatively when giving actors too much credit. This conceit is a mealy premise; too many holes and frayed edges.  Experience is still the best font to draw from.

You can fumble your way to as close approximation as you can try to shore-up-the-gap with your imagination...but the actor with the authentic experience 'has the edge'.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:


Having problems?

Contact Us