Denzel gives the performance Laurence Fishburne thinks he's giving in his head, which, of course, always comes out overbearing and strident.
Back to the trailer: It stupidly gives away the entire story (I'm not paying $10 just to see if they win) and sags in the middle with too many plot points.
Finally, if I never hear Trailer Guys say, "In a time of chnage..." again, it will be too soon.
The movie will be better than it looks because Denzel and Whitaker are impossible not to like even in crap like JOHN Q and SPECIES.
Boy, that Denzel is a real character actor. I like how he tries to give a different performance in every movie. The title of this movie should be Frank Lucas Jumps In a Time Machine and Tries to Undo All The Harm He Caused to The Black Race.
If you want to see the penultimate film about debaters, rent Listen to Me, the 1988 tear-jerker starring Kirk Cameron, Jami Gertz and Tim ("I'm not going to tell you again, my name is not Dylan McDermott, and yes, you can substitute fresh fruit if you don't want the fries") Quill.
Actually, it's very possible not to like Denzel or Forest in a lot of movies. And you don't even have to try very hard. All you have to do is stare at the screen.
Grace Kelly was a talentless bimbo who got out of the biz at the sight of the first royal dick that was waved in her face.
The only thing Humphrey Bogart knew how to do was smoke a cigarette.
John Wayne was a fraud.
Katherine Hepburn always acted peevish, a trait that is shared by David Caruso.
Henry Fonda was a sentimental twit who consistently went for the easiest emotion available and flung it at the audience like an ape with a spongified brain.
Errol Flynn was a walking erection and not even half the man that his son Sean was.
Cary Grant was too in love with his own reflection to fulfill his potential as the heir to Buster Keaton. Instead he ended up being the proto-Burt Reynolds.
James Cagney was an Xmas ham with an extra layer of cracklin' honey spread.
Today I hate the old and the dead.
Give me life.
Give me some of that juice!
I do NOT get all of the Denzel hate, lately. The guy is truly one of our premiere actors - he gives consistently strong performances and is always charismatic. I will admit that I do not find American Gangster to be one of his most showy performances - I think that given the role, people were expecting a lot of Al Pacino or Daniel Day-Lewis histrionics, but that is simply now how the role was written. He serves the role and serves it well.
Yeah, he has his Denzel-isms, but every major star has common traits they bring to all of their performances - Clooney, Cruise, Jackson, Crowe, Smith, DiCaprio, you name it.
Inside Man has been on cable, a lot lately, and Denzel is just so much fun to watch in that movie - he seems so relaxed and witty and I think if he had done that kind of performance in American Gangster, a lot of viewers would have been more satisified.
Geoff I agree with you. But there's a lot of that recently with almost every actor, esp. the ones "over 40." I think people expect them to give a gritty over-the-top performance, instead of a steady constrained one. It could be that maybe he's making too many movies, releasing too many movies in one year (like Samuel Jackson and Hackman)?....I don't know, but he won me over as Lucas...my only complaint was that Lucas was a southerner and Denzel came off as a NYer...
There's a great bit on the Star Trek: Wrath of Khan extras where director Nicholas Meyer talks about the difference between a "movie star" and an "actor."
It's obvious but something we usually don't think of:
Movie Stars are always the same and actors blend.
While doing Star Trek II he was constantly trying to get Shatner to be less of a movie star and more of an actor.
Obviously Denzel is a movie star. Is this news?
(And obviously, everyone Dirty Harry lists is a movie star too.)
If you prefer actors, well, you can go see Paul Giamatti. He has something new out this week.
comment #1
Dirty Harry
says ...
Denzel gives the performance Laurence Fishburne thinks he's giving in his head, which, of course, always comes out overbearing and strident.
Back to the trailer: It stupidly gives away the entire story (I'm not paying $10 just to see if they win) and sags in the middle with too many plot points.
Finally, if I never hear Trailer Guys say, "In a time of chnage..." again, it will be too soon.
The movie will be better than it looks because Denzel and Whitaker are impossible not to like even in crap like JOHN Q and SPECIES.
Posted by Dirty Harry
at November 8, 2007 3:50 PM
comment #2
MilkMan
says ...
Boy, that Denzel is a real character actor. I like how he tries to give a different performance in every movie. The title of this movie should be Frank Lucas Jumps In a Time Machine and Tries to Undo All The Harm He Caused to The Black Race.
If you want to see the penultimate film about debaters, rent Listen to Me, the 1988 tear-jerker starring Kirk Cameron, Jami Gertz and Tim ("I'm not going to tell you again, my name is not Dylan McDermott, and yes, you can substitute fresh fruit if you don't want the fries") Quill.
Posted by MilkMan
at November 8, 2007 3:57 PM
comment #3
bmcintire
says ...
Which is the performance that Samuel Jackson gives when he is wearing glasses.
Posted by bmcintire
at November 8, 2007 4:04 PM
comment #4
MilkMan
says ...
Actually, it's very possible not to like Denzel or Forest in a lot of movies. And you don't even have to try very hard. All you have to do is stare at the screen.
Posted by MilkMan
at November 8, 2007 4:05 PM
comment #5
Dirty Harry
says ...
"Boy, that Denzel is a real character actor. I like how he tries to give a different performance in every movie."
You must really hate Henry Fonda, Jimmy Stewart, John Wayne, Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn, Grace Kelly, Errol Flynn, Jimmy Cagney, Humphrey Bogart...
Posted by Dirty Harry
at November 8, 2007 4:06 PM
comment #6
Dirty Harry
says ...
I just accidentally clicked on that Lions For Lambs advertisement: HELP GOD MY EYES!
Posted by Dirty Harry
at November 8, 2007 4:08 PM
comment #7
Jack Price
says ...
No. Not having any of it.
This year's Mona Lisa Smile. Or Mr. Holland's Opus.
For a better use of Don LaFontaine's voice-over talents, see here:
http://lafontainesafety.ytmnd.com/
Posted by Jack Price
at November 8, 2007 4:40 PM
comment #8
MilkMan
says ...
Grace Kelly was a talentless bimbo who got out of the biz at the sight of the first royal dick that was waved in her face.
The only thing Humphrey Bogart knew how to do was smoke a cigarette.
John Wayne was a fraud.
Katherine Hepburn always acted peevish, a trait that is shared by David Caruso.
Henry Fonda was a sentimental twit who consistently went for the easiest emotion available and flung it at the audience like an ape with a spongified brain.
Errol Flynn was a walking erection and not even half the man that his son Sean was.
Cary Grant was too in love with his own reflection to fulfill his potential as the heir to Buster Keaton. Instead he ended up being the proto-Burt Reynolds.
James Cagney was an Xmas ham with an extra layer of cracklin' honey spread.
Today I hate the old and the dead.
Give me life.
Give me some of that juice!
Posted by MilkMan
at November 8, 2007 4:46 PM
comment #9
frankbooth
says ...
No, no, John Wayne was a fag. Not fraud, fag.
He was, too, you boys. I installed two-way mirrors in his pad in Brentwood, and he come to the door in a dress.
Posted by frankbooth
at November 8, 2007 6:56 PM
comment #10
Geoff
says ...
I do NOT get all of the Denzel hate, lately. The guy is truly one of our premiere actors - he gives consistently strong performances and is always charismatic. I will admit that I do not find American Gangster to be one of his most showy performances - I think that given the role, people were expecting a lot of Al Pacino or Daniel Day-Lewis histrionics, but that is simply now how the role was written. He serves the role and serves it well.
Yeah, he has his Denzel-isms, but every major star has common traits they bring to all of their performances - Clooney, Cruise, Jackson, Crowe, Smith, DiCaprio, you name it.
Inside Man has been on cable, a lot lately, and Denzel is just so much fun to watch in that movie - he seems so relaxed and witty and I think if he had done that kind of performance in American Gangster, a lot of viewers would have been more satisified.
Posted by Geoff
at November 9, 2007 2:16 AM
comment #11
Chicago48
says ...
Geoff I agree with you. But there's a lot of that recently with almost every actor, esp. the ones "over 40." I think people expect them to give a gritty over-the-top performance, instead of a steady constrained one. It could be that maybe he's making too many movies, releasing too many movies in one year (like Samuel Jackson and Hackman)?....I don't know, but he won me over as Lucas...my only complaint was that Lucas was a southerner and Denzel came off as a NYer...
Posted by Chicago48
at November 9, 2007 4:50 AM
comment #12
Mark B
says ...
"James Cagney was an Xmas ham with an extra layer of cracklin' honey spread."
Whoa! Them's fightin' words. Don't be dissin' Cagney!
Posted by Mark B
at November 9, 2007 5:09 AM
comment #13
DavidF
says ...
There's a great bit on the Star Trek: Wrath of Khan extras where director Nicholas Meyer talks about the difference between a "movie star" and an "actor."
It's obvious but something we usually don't think of:
Movie Stars are always the same and actors blend.
While doing Star Trek II he was constantly trying to get Shatner to be less of a movie star and more of an actor.
Obviously Denzel is a movie star. Is this news?
(And obviously, everyone Dirty Harry lists is a movie star too.)
If you prefer actors, well, you can go see Paul Giamatti. He has something new out this week.
Posted by DavidF
at November 9, 2007 6:30 AM