You know what I’m talking about. Horrendous writing, iffy direction, incompetent dialogue, the works…yet, certain actors, mustering all their skill at the craft and giving it everything they’ve got, give a performance so excellent that it shines through the surrounding pile of crap to lend the movie what is perhaps its sole redeeming quality.
The most recent example of this that I’ve seen was Ron Perlman in Hellboy. As a sometime fan of the comic books and a longtime fan of cinema in general, I found the movie less than enthralling. Perlman himself, however, was fantastic. Even through a metric ton of makeup, he embodied the character as if he’d been born to play the part. Even though I didn’t like the movie, I will be going to see the sequel just to watch Perlman’s performance.
Number two would be Tom Cruise in Collateral. His characterization of a self-deluded apathetic sociopath was so spot-on that I left this movie temporarily convinced that I liked it. A brief review of the majority of what actually happened in the movie disabused me of that notion, but Cruise still totally nailed the part. Foxx was no slouch himself, but the character (through no fault of Foxx’s) simply wasn’t as interesting and didn’t require quite as much effort.
I’ll also give a nod here to Ewan McGregor for his role in Episode One. While the movie itself was insipid, and didn’t really give any of the actors the opportunity to do anything compelling, the work that McGregor quite clearly put into duplicating Alec Guinness’ performance as Obi-Wan Kenobi – from the gestures and mannerisms to the accent and timbre of the voice – increased my respect for his abilities tenfold. His acting adds a touch of real continuity to the Star Wars universe. Of course, pretty much the entire rest of the movie works hard to dilute that continuity into irrelevance, but hey, McGregor did what he could.
So, what acting do you enjoy in movies that you, well, don’t?
I disagree about Collateral. I think Cruise was cheweing the scenery the way he always do nowadays. However, I think that Michael Mann’s movie is absolutely riveting. It’s an interesting continuation of Heat, about two men locked in a struggle on the two sides of the law. Enough about that.
Michael Caine and Gene Hackman. There are far too many crappy movies between them to list them all. But they are always good.
I thought all the acting in the Talented Mr. Ripley was well done. I also thougt that the movie sucked. At no time did I care about any of the characters and really was only interested in how quickly it would end.
Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson in Lost in Translation. Not that I have anything against movies where the emphasis is on characterization rather than plot. It’s just that the movie was clumsy in its attempt to achieve that goal. Good acting from the two leads, though, which made it even more of a pity that the story was so bad.
Good point about Lost in Translation. I thought the movie was horribly boring. That might be why Bill Murray’s performance stood out so much.
Another movie that comes to mind is Tombstone. I am not a fan of westerns at all, but Val Kilmer’s performance makes this one of my favorite movies. He steals every single scene he is in, it’s truly an amazing performance.
I think I’m in the minority when I say that I thought My Best Friend’s Wedding was not a good movie. However, I thought Cameron Diaz was absolutely brilliant in it. The karaoke scene alone should’ve earned her an Oscar nomination.
Another agree for the two stars in Lost in Translation. I really, really wanted to like it, but just didn’t. On the other hand I really, really dislike Bill Murray in everything else he’s ever done, but thought he was superb in this one. Go figure.
Harold Perrineau Jr. (who?) in Baz Luhrman’s Romeo + Juliet. His Mercutio was absolutely astounding in an otherwise overdone, overhyped piece of tripe. (And I’m the biggest fan ever of Moulin Rouge, so yes I “get” Lurhman, I just don’t think it worked in this case.) In fact, looking over his IMDB listings, I might actually rent The Tempest, which I have heretofore avoided for similar fears.
Waiting to Exhale was one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. Angela Bassett’s performance in it, however, was spectacular.
I think I’d also like to nominate Quiz Show. I like the movie…a lot. If it’s on, I’m going to watch it. The reason I like it is for the performances. The movie was very well acted. One of my favorite scenes is when Rob Morrow’s character confronts David Paymer’s character with the certified letter one of the contestants sent himself with the answers to a yet-to-be-aired show. David Paymer’s look of defeat followed by a weak “Why would he do that?” was great.
Actually, I was just discussing this topic with my friends this weekend when we watched Closer. I called it the “Best worst movie I’ve ever seen.” The acting was superb (though I admit that I know little about acting). However, what I do know, story, construction, foundation, were all seriously lacking. It was watching the same story over and over again. It brough up such a weird feeling, I was entertained, and I liked watching it, but it was a terribe movie. I even felt it had good direction, just no real story. If it went on any longer, I probably would’ve left as one can only explore the theme so many ways without being derivative.
I disagree with others on Lost in Translation and Collateral, which I thought were both superb, exceptional movies. Collateral was one of the best things I’ve seen in a long time, and I thought Cruise was better there, than he was in A Few Good Men.
Child actor Dakota Fanning could have won an Oscar with her performance in… Uptown Girls. Yes, it’s a pretty crappy coming of age movie with no pretentions at being much more, but dang that kid can act the hind leg off a horse (and I like child actors about as much as I like children)