Shatner - Kirk
Nimoy - Spock
Spiner - Data
Actually, most of Star Trek, save for Patrick Stewart.
I’d argue Shatner is just as good – actually BETTER – as Denny Crane on Boston Legal, since he’s aware of his “Shatnerisms” and uses them to great effect.
I have to hijack a little bit – while Spiner will always be known for Data, you don’t really get a good sense of his acting ability due to the character’s limitations. When he was on Threshold, he got to show off a little more, and he’s a far better actor than TNG might lead someone to believe.
Sean Penn - Jeff Spicoli
Tom Hanks - Forrest Gump
Charlton Heston- Moses
Kirk Douglas - Spartacus
George Burns - God
John Belushi - pick a role, Bluto or Jake Blues. Like John Wayne, no matter who he played, he was himself.
Did you see Continental Divide? or Neighbors?
With the distinction that we are looking for a representative film, not their “signature” role, I offer that most stars should be represented by not their biggest films, but by some of their more mediocre fare. After all, a full career is more about the near hits or misses than the legendary works.
Tom Hanks- Castaway. A pretty mediocre film, but it is telling of Hanks’s impact and style that he could make you feel a connection with a piece of athletic equipment.
Julia Roberts- Runaway Bride. A decent but unmemorable role, especially compared to other films in her filmography. But other than the occasional gem, her career is a string of unmemorable, saccharine filled romantic comedies.
George Clooney- Oceans 12. That’s right. The sequel. Clooney is a fun actor, and has a few really good pictures. But for the most part, the guy’s CAREER is debonair, suave movie star. No film says shallow, but fun, like Oceans 12.
Russell Crowe- Master and Commander. Crowe’s filmography looks pretty good at this point in his career. He’s had WAY more homeruns than strike outs. But I feel M&C is kind of the most representative of his rather diverse choices. It is tough to find a midway point between a gladiator/Depression era boxer and a whistleblower tobacco exec/insane math genius. M&C kind of sums up both, offering Crowe as something of a poet-warrior.
Robin Williams- This one is tough as there are two Robin Williams. The academy award winning actor who has done some great work (GWH, Good Morning Vietnam, Fisher King, and Dead Poets) and some serious crap (Death to Smootchie). Unfortunately, a lot of his work, even when he tries to be serious, turn to crap. Sadly, to represent the totality of his career, I offer Patch Adams. A terrible flick that offers Williams in a serious, but schlocky role.
Johnny Depp- Also difficult. Jack Sparrow is not the answer. It is a GREAT role, but it does not typify his career. It is only a part of his arsenal. For Depp, I offer Chocolat. In that film, he has the smarm of Sparrow, but a little more depth.
Harrison Ford- I would have said Indy, but I liked Chanteuse’s logic.
Adam Sandler- I think Lemur866’s call that ANY film is representative is a great point, but if forced to choose, I’d go with Big Daddy. Sandler, even in his frat boy films (I thought Spanglish and PDL were good, serious films), has tried to be more emotional lately (see Williams, Robin). His early films like Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison are better, but the trend of trying to inject serious behavior into his stupid movies didn’t start until Big Daddy.
Arnold Schwarzenegger- While Terminator is his signature role, Baffle makes an interesting suggestion of Kindergarten Cop. Arnold’s career HAS mostly teetered between action and comedy. That is why I think his career can best be encapsulated with the film True Lies. It is the film (his best, IMNSHO) that really balances the two.
Bruce Willis - Die Hard - Sensitive, funny, caring yet tough and willing to use extreme violence. Everything Bruce Willis does was in that role.
Al Pacino - And Justice for All - you’ve got the sensitive Pacino, the confused Pacino, the bombastic Pacino, and the broken-down Pacino, all in one role.
Bruce Campbell - The Evil Dead
Harrison Ford - Raiders of the Lost Ark. Indiana Jones is more representative of the actor than is Han Solo.
Anthony Hopkins - Silence of the Lambs. Hopkins plays intelligent, reserved men with hidden depths. Hannibal’s hidden depth was his ability to kill and eat people, but the essence of the character wasn’t so much different than his other roles.
Jeff Goldblum - The Fly. Brundlefly had everything Goldblum does captured in one creepy mansect.
UH NO.
Keanu Reeves : The Matrix
Keanue Reeves’s career is best summed up with the movie Speed.
Yeah, but what other non-singer took a ***singing ***role from Sinatra? I would’ve been pissed too.
Gary Cooper showed more range in Pride of the Yankees to me. I think this is his ultimate role. Comedy, Bravery and a Love story in one role.
DeNiro as Travis Bickle summarizes DeNiro to me. It showed enormous range and more areas of his acting talent than even Raging Bull.
Jimmy Stewart’s ultimate Jimmy Stewart role might be as Jefferson Smith. He was better in many movies, but this movie summarizes the basic goodness and quiet heroism that Stewart overall projected.
Jim
Sean Connery. James Bond.
Timothy Dalton, Ditto.
Not surprising as Sean Connery was playing Sean Connery playing James Bond.
Just like John Wayne was playing John Wayne playing (fill in name of character.)*
There are a lot of actors like that.
[sub]*It’s weird, but the only characters portrayed by John Wayne that I can name are Ghengis Khan (snicker) and Red Adair. Both real people. When I refer to John Wayne movies, I reference John Wayne’s character as John Wayne. I can’t think of anyone else that gets that type of treatment.[/sub]
Audrey Hepburn - Breakfast at Tiffany’s.
But she was Princess Ann, Sabrina Fairchild and Jo Stockton early.
Then she was Sister Luke to prove she wasn’t just a pretty girl.
Finally she does Holly Golightly but then moves on to just as famous a role as Eliza Doolittle.
She than ran off three very different and great roles as Nicole Bonnet, Susy Hendrix & Lady Marian.
I do not think Holly Golightly can sum her up. I just saw Sabrina again yesterday and How to Steal a Million a few weeks back. She was so much more than Holly.
Jim
stanley kowalski: THE defining moment in his career by the use of method acting.
yes, okay, it was scenery-chewing at it’s finest (by our standards today, anyway. can you see today’s lightweights like pitt and decaprio doing what he did??), but it was the first time an actor really let it all hang out on film and made ‘raw’ the new thing in acting. not even james dean could compete with brando for that.
You make good points. I would just add that the progress of “method acting” over the decades might be exemplified by the difference in tone and volume between Stanley and Don Vito. Where one shows “raw emotion” bursting forth, the other shows “raw emotion” contained. How many years must go by before we see Don Vito as “scenery-chewing”? And how many years before we can see the difference between “good acting” and “just being there”?
As a case in point on this last issue: Keanu Reeves.
snert, snicker, snort. 
gawd, so so true, zeldar. SO, so true…