Is reddit right?
reddit is far left
the only non-murderous psychopath is in the middle
>>223606505What are the "criteria" they mention? Is it only Hollywood films? Only English-language films? It looked as though it was "only modern films" except for the Brando in there.
Well at least they didn't put Walter White up there
>>223606630I regret looking it up>Pick one from the post, or suggest your own>The question is limited to Hollywood, so no Arthouse or International performances (obviously feel free to mention if you like!)>>>It should be a performance that if it was given today it would be just as impressive. So a lot of black & white movies lose out on this basis IMO.>It must be a performance where you don't see the actor for a single second, only the character the actor is portraying>P.s. the middle tile is Marlon Brando playing Stanley Kowalski from Streetcar Named Desire (not On the Waterfront
>>223606630>only modern films"Nigger, Misery and Godfather are closer to Brando than to Heath Legend, how can you consider them "modern"
>>223606505retaRDED
>no niggersuh… based?
>>223606505putting heath ledger on there is fucking retarded. he's an awful actor and was awful as the tongue-flicking joker
>>223606656>>P.s. the middle tile is Marlon Brando playing Stanley Kowalski from Streetcar Named Desire (not On the Waterfront
>>223606505>No Kilmer as Doc Holliday
>>223606660Well obviously it's a bit arbitrary but I would consider post-Star Wars (1977) as modern.Even if you disagree with that specific date, it seems reasonable to put the dividing line somewhere in the 1970s. I mean Hollywood has been going for about a century and 1970 is about in the middle of that century.
>>223606741That one is too reddit even for reddit
>no doc holiday
>>223606505I'll never understand the hype for Pacino in Godfather. He gets completely mogged by almost any other actor in those movies, even De Niro
>>223606656OK, if it's "Hollywood only" it's a bit less ridiculous. Lots of non-Hollywood stuff is better than a lot of those.They are all fun watchable performances if you like scenery-chewing. I don't really agree with lots of them but whatever.
>>223606792>arbitraryi dont think that word means what you think it means. maybe you meant subjective?>50 years ago is modernnah senpai. post-2000 is modern. 70's-90's is retro. everything before that is ooooold
>>223607037>modernity started in my lifetime
>>223606505overacted hollywood sloppa
>>223607136This. Just amazing how people fall for the “Look I’m ACTING! Can’t you see I’m ACTING!” That is the easiest form of acting ever! Hardest is doing subtle stuff and selling it
>>223606803see >>223606798
>>223607077no. the early 90's was just more 80's. the mid-90's-2000 was kino. then it all went to shit. everything after "it all went to shit" is modern.
>>223607199Sounds like an arbitrary distinction based off of your birth year.
>>223606814Pacino is OK in Godfather but I don't think it's his best performance. Dog Day Afternoon or Serpico are better for a start.
>>223607243Im not saying hes bad, I just dont think its that "once in a lifetime" GOAT performance people seem to claim it is. The 10 minutes Brando is on screen are way more memorable. Or De Niro in the sequel. Even Duvall or Caan I like more in those movies
>>223607216subjective, yes. arbitrary, not to me. :)
>>223607289Duvall is a superior to all of them because he can sell it without over acting all the time.
Ranking actors/movies like they're football quarterbacks is the most soulless way to discuss films
>>223606505O'Toole's Lawrence, Lion in Winter, Becket are better or on par with the quad in top left. The truly innovative are Hopkins, Ledger, Bates. How is Pesci better than Cazale, Robards, PSH?
>>223606601Seems like it's far easier to play a psychopath than a genuine, deep character
>>223607305The definition of every word is at your fingertips
>>223607188Yeah these are all fun performances but a very narrow range. (insane OTT scenery-chewing). Iif you have 8 / 9 homicidal lunatics you perhaps need to broaden your taste a bit.Kathy Bates in Misery is the weakest I would say. Character has no depth. Why they're including her ahead of F. Murray Abraham in Amadeus or Meryl Streep in Sophie's Choice or Vivian Leigh in Gone With The Wind (etc) I don't know.
>>223606505why is /tv/ pretending like at least 90% of those performance are gigakino? reddit is retarded, but forced contrarianism even more so
Fuck nah
>>223607721Nobody saying they aren’t good movies but doesn’t mean it’s great or even the best acting.
>>223606505It needs more Star Wars and Lord of the Rings characters.
>I'M CRAZY!!!L'acting.
>all those yuropoors coping ITTlmao. of course the greatest performance will be from Hollywood. We've seen yuropoor movies, you have the cringiest, most forced overacting on earth. Everything feels fake. American actors are the only ones acting realistically
>>223607377you should try it (and stop saying arbitrary when you mean subjective)
