MontyC

FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE Next: bad singer

Sam Elliott?

> > {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote: }{quote}Seems to me that leading ladies don't do a lot of great movies in a row, like they did in the '30s-'50s. I agree with you Fred (although as Dargo pointed out, not sure Sean Young is the perfect example of what you're saying). I'll tell you what I think it is: one of the ways to test an actor's motives as to why they got into acting is to look at their career after they become rich & famous. I've noticed that a lot of actresses these days (Halie Berry, Angelina Jolie, Charleze Theron, etc.) once they win their Oscar, basically disappear (yeah they're in a movie every four or five years but nothing like their output pre-Oscar). That tells me that they're really more interested in being a star than being a good actor. Compare that with somebody like DeNiro--he kept working & wanting to improve as an actor even though he won his 1st Oscar almost 40 years ago.

> {quote:title=EugeniaH wrote:}{quote}I wonder, though, with actors choosing good movies, it's still a cr*pshoot, because what ends up on screen could be very different from how it reads on paper. But that's probably another topic. But it was still 'good' that Clark Gable didn't get to choose his own roles. I'm sure no one was more surprised than he when GWTW became the success that it did. Of course it's a crap shoot. Nobody goes to Hollywood for the pension plan.

Jane Russell Marilyn Monroe Jayne Mansifield Six of the biggest stars in Hollywood history

Helen Twelvetrees was in SHE GETS HER MAN with Virginia Grey Virginia Grey was in THE WOMEN with Rosssalind Russell Rossalind Russell was in PICNIC with William Holden William Holden was in TOWERING INFERNO with Paul Newman Next: Tatum O'Neal

I always thought one of the biggest talents a star needs is the ability to chose good movies. Think about it. Of all the stars you are a fan of, how many of them have never made a movie that you weren't also a fan of. My guess is zero. We like stars when they are in good movies playing characters we like. And in the studio system, actors were assigned roles--not given a choice. And that's why I think somebody like Clark Gable wouldn't have been a star had he been allowed to chose his own roles. Almost without exception, he would have chosen not to be in his greatest movies if he'd had his druthers: Gone With the Wind, It Happened One Night, Mutiny on the Bounty.

Character actors get hired because they can act. Stars get hired because of their draw at the box office.

Hmmm . . .interesting EugeniaH. IMO, character actors are generally better actors than stars whereas stars in general have more charisma than character actors (which is the opposite opinion of whoever wrote the quote in Movie Morlocks). There are exceptions, of course. Brando was very charismatic AND a great actor, for example. I feel that charisma is the most important element that determines stardom--even more important than looks & WAY more important than whether a star can act or not. How talented they are as an actor is almost beside the point. Would we like to hang out with this person? Do we want to know more about them? Would we like to be like them or sleep with them? Do we like being in their company? Would we like to have a beer with them? If the answer to these questions about a given performer is yes, than said performer has a great chance of becoming a star.

> {quote:title=EugeniaH wrote:}{quote}Marilyn Monroe - I wonder if people would say she is charismatic, or just incredibly beautiful? BOTH!!!!

> {quote:title=EugeniaH wrote:}{quote}I just noticed the new blog posted at Movie Morlocks, and the opening lines are intriguing: > > > > *"Some actors have great talent but little charisma. Charisma, that intangible quality so difficult to explain but so easy to spot, is something only the greatest performers possess and most of them, in the history of cinema, have fallen into the character actor/supporting player role."* I definitely disagree with whoever made this statement you cited, EugeniaH. Charisma is one thing all stars have in common, even moreso than looks (yeah, you might think such-and-such star doesn't have charisma but I guarantee you SOMEBODY does or they wouldn't be a star).

You got it!!! Your thread, Lana . . .

JOURNEY FOR MARGARET Next: red tape

OUT OF THE PAST (1947)

LOVE the Beatles (and thus the Rutles). My favorite scene in the Rutles: They're on top of the roof (meant to simulate the the Beatles' roof top gig during Let it Be). A roadie squats down in front of "John" to hook up a chord. John, annoyed at this guy being in his way, kicks him in the arse sending him flying off the roof from ten stories up (his screams geting softer & softer). Cracks me up just thinking about it.

Great song, C.Bogie. Do you happen to know who's singing backup on Mohammad's Radio?

THE EGG & I

> {quote:title=Cobolt wrote:}{quote}I just wanna know after the french cops grab Ugarte at Rick's they surely would have questioned him, why wouldn't Ugarte have blabbed to them in some vain attempt to save his hide that he gave the letters of transit to Rick to put in his safe??? Why? Coz it's a movie. Look hard enough & you'll find holes in any plot.

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote} > > I've never considered "over-acting" - if that is what is meant by "hammy" - to be such a bad thing. Some of the most memorable performances could be deemed "hammy", and yet, we do remember them. > When an actor is showing off or drawing undo attention to themselves then that's hammy. Or if they're obviously too emotional for the scene or their character. Some of the actors & performances you mentioned I like too. Swanson in Sunset Blvd. Barrymore in 20th Century. But those actors were intentionally playing hammy. Yeah, I know a lot of people like Bette Davis & think she's a great actress, and I'm not disputing that. She just seems too "big" to me. To be fair to her, good acting in her day had a different definition than what it does today. Pre-Brando, good acting meant packing as much emotion into a performance as possible. The more emotional, the better. Post-Brando, good acting means being as honest & truthful as possible in imaginary circumstances. Don't think she's a bad actress, just her style ain't my cup a tea.

Funny thing about Hitchock. This thread is "all about acting" I read that Hitchcock HATED method actors. The two actors he hated directing the most were Montgomery Clift & Paul Newman. At least that's what I read. Who the hell knows if its true or not

You are not kidding, Fiendish!!! Montgomery Clift's my FAVORITE actor (as you might've guessed). There's a scene in a movie he made with Jennifer Jones (can't think of the name of it off the top a the ol' noggin--anybody know?) Jennifer Jones is on a train. Clift is running along the platform looking desperately for her through the train windows. WE THE AUDIENCE knows she's on the train but he doesn't. It's a medium close-up of Clift. He's frantically running along the platform & falls down. Then he sees her & the look in his eyes is heartbreak. AT NO TIME does the camera cut away to Jones on the train. But WE KNOW EXACTLY when Clift sees her just because of the look in his eyes. I get choked up just thinking about it!!

I believe Taxi Driver is what inspired Hinkley to take a pop at Reagan. Hinkley & Travis both had a thing for Jodi Foster, it would seem.

It woulda been fun hanging out with the Rat Pack when they made OCEAN'S ELEVEN AND ROBIN AND THE SEVEN HOODS.

BORN FREE Next: swimming pool

Zelig (1983)