It was the best of roles; it was the worst of roles

Cafe Society
1

Pick an actor.
Identify your choice for his/her best role.
Same for worst role.
Give that actor an overall rating from 1-5 (5 high) for where you have that person ranked in your list of actors.

Brando
Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named Desire
whatever it was in Missouri Breaks
4

2

Jean Harlow
Best: zany film star Lola Burns in Bombshell
Worst: weepy WWI wife in Suzy
Rating: 4 (does “rating” stand for how much we like them or how brilliant we thing they were?)

3

Kevin Costner
Best: The Big Chill in the role of the corpse
Worst: Too hard to narrow down
Rating: not on my list

Okay. I’ll try another: Fred Dalton Thompson
Best: his current role as the DA on Law and Order
Worst: Marie in the role of Fred Dalton Thompson
Rating: Not on my list

One more time and I will get the hang of this.
Paul Newman
Best: Worst:The Silver Chalice
Best: Cool Hand Luke
Rating: He’s second on my list of favorite actors

4

Yes, Eve, the rating is for how you would rate that actor on a scale of 1-5 for her/his overall quality in your own personal rating system. Not that there would be only five on your list, but in the same way you might use a 5-star rating for the best (among equals in the same category). I just used 5 instead of the traditional 4 so 3 would be “right in the middle” and would allow for a little more shading than is usual.

A rank of 1 would say “this actor might as well be a chicken farmer for all I care” while 5 would say “among the very best.”

Just a shorthand for overall value as an actor was all I was after.

Somehow I feel even this isn’t clear, but the bottom line is it’s no big deal.