# top 10 over rated actors of all time?



## billc

Here is a list of top ten over rated actors.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/b...n-most-overrated-actorsactresses-of-all-time/

I think the list is pretty good, Clooney, Nicholson, some good picks.


----------



## Omar B

Sorry.  There can be only 1!


----------



## Big Don

Missed a bunch...
Snipes, Cruise, Damon, Affleck...


----------



## Steve

The only one I agree with is Tom hanks.

Some over rated actors, in my opinion include downey jr, Julia Roberts, harrison ford, and tommy lee jones.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Omar B

Ya know I'm kidding about the Arnold thing right?  If anything he is way under rated.


----------



## Big Don

Omar B said:


> Ya know I'm kidding about the Arnold thing right?  If anything he is way under rated.


Seriously? It doesn't take a lot of acting skill to shoot people, blow things up and act like a badass... 
It must take work to KEEP the accent after all these years...


----------



## WC_lun

I'd add the Baldwins.  Haven't seen anything with any of them that have particularly impressed me.


----------



## Big Don

WC_lun said:


> I'd add the Baldwins.  Haven't seen anything with any of them that have particularly impressed me.


amen


----------



## Tez3

I think the title should have been 'movie' or for us 'film' actors. Real actors act on the stage where every bit of their techniques, emotional awareness, timing etc is on show and can be judged in person by the audience. Making films is easy just redo a scene if it's not right, on the stage it's live and has to be right. Very few film actors can make it on the stage. The only Americans I can think of are Kevin Spacey who's also the artistic director at the Old Vic here and Gillian Anderson.


----------



## Buka

Interesting list. Those actors have been nominated for thirty Academy Awards between them, but I guess that doesn't count. Anyone who's read Shapiro (the author of that list) knows his stance on Hollywood, especially on Hollywood democrats, which happens to comprise that list.


----------



## Tez3

Buka said:


> Interesting list. Those actors have been nominated for thirty Academy Awards between them, but I guess that doesn't count. Anyone who's read Shapiro (the author of that list) knows his stance on Hollywood, especially on Hollywood democrats, which happens to comprise that list.



I haven't read Shapiro but you can always take an educated guess than when Bill posts up these things they are always pro right and anti left lol! I take it for granted now that anything he posts up is slanted that way.


----------



## granfire

Tez3 said:


> I haven't read Shapiro but you can always take an educated guess than when Bill posts up these things they are always pro right and anti left lol! I take it for granted now that anything he posts up is slanted that way.



Slanted?

You mean like the sides of mt Everest?


----------



## WC_lun

granfire said:


> Slanted?
> 
> You mean like the sides of mt Everest?



I LOL'ed at this.  Thanks


----------



## Tez3

granfire said:


> Slanted?
> 
> You mean like the sides of mt Everest?



LOL, oh yes the side of the communist Mt Everest!


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> I think the title should have been 'movie' or for us 'film' actors. Real actors act on the stage where every bit of their techniques, emotional awareness, timing etc is on show and can be judged in person by the audience. Making films is easy just redo a scene if it's not right, on the stage it's live and has to be right. Very few film actors can make it on the stage. The only Americans I can think of are Kevin Spacey who's also the artistic director at the Old Vic here and Gillian Anderson.


Oh Tez, your bias is showing.  Why do you hate America?  We love you guys!  Liv Schreiber, Hugh Jackman, Ed Norton, Neil Patrick Harris, Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, Mandy Patinkin, Kelsey Grammar, Jude Law, James Earl Jones.  I know a couple of those guys are Aussies, but this is off the top of my head.  Some Brits in the mix, too.  Ewan McGregor and the kid from Harry Potter and Cate Blanchett from 

Anyway, lots of actors try it, most are unsuccessful.  But many move back and forth with aplomb.


----------



## MA-Caver

Hmph, If that is his "worst" list then I'd like to see his "best/greatest" list. 
Hmm, if all these are so bad then why are they so popular? I guess he's the only one with great taste in the country.  True some actors do seem to re-perform the same character from their last three films which was a spin off from the character they portrayed two films earlier and so on. 
Actors can only work with the scripts and directors they're given. Directors are responsible for making sure the actor is doing their job and "putting the corresponding face to the corresponding emotion"* and giving the potential audience exactly what the character in the film is feeling/thinking/doing/et al. 
Spencer Tracy was one of those actors that could be given a script a week or two before filming starts, and then show up and never have to refer back to it again. He was known for even reminding the other actors of their lines. Called I think a photographic memory.  I've seen a lot of Tracy's films and I haven't seen the same character. Hepburn basically the same as far as her performances, particularly when acting alongside Tracy who helped many an actor do their best. 
As for Peck, his range was good. His Ahab was radically different from his Atticus Finch as was his Captian Mallory (Guns Of Navarone)... 
DeCaprio is IMO getting better. I recall first seeing him in Gilbert Grape and actually thought he was retarded, his later films were not bad but he's still learning IMO.
Streep... the woman has won more academy awards than any other actress previous to her... what does that say? 
Nicholson. Nuff said. The man knows what he's doing in front of the camera, and has managed to do well with his characters. 

Like I said I'd like to see that guy's greatest 10 list and see what he considers good.


----------



## Steve

Nicholson was awesome in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Few Good Men, Shining, As Good as it Gets, and Easy Rider, off the top of my head.

I agree with Caver regarding DiCaprio.  I like him and he's getting better as he gets older.  I put him in the category where most actors/actresses fall.  They don't make good movies bad, but aren't good enough to make a bad movie good.  If that makes sense.   He's solid... neutral.  

Clooney was terrific in Up in the Air.  But he's at his best when he's playing a rackish rogue, as in Ocean's 11, or quirky comedy, like Oh Brother Where Art Thou.  Is he going to win an academy award any time soon?  Maybe not, but that doesn't make him over rated.


----------



## Tez3

It's not a list of actors based on their acting or even lack of acting skills it's a list of actors who's political leanings aren't approved of by the list maker. I actually prefer to see acting live and love the theatre, films are fine but the intimacy and 'aliveness' of the stage to me is far more enjoyable and I love getting into the story. Films for me are just light entertainment, watched then forgotten basically. I can admire the acting skills though of any actor despite what he thinks about things outside of his /her work.


----------



## punisher73

WC_lun said:


> I'd add the Baldwins. Haven't seen anything with any of them that have particularly impressed me.



I wouldn't add them simply because people never go on and on about what a great actor they are.  They might be popular in movies or in a lot of them, but never heard anyone comment on their skill as an actor.


----------



## punisher73

Tez3 said:


> *It's not a list of actors based on their acting or even lack of acting skills it's a list of actors who's political leanings aren't approved of by the list maker*. I actually prefer to see acting live and love the theatre, films are fine but the intimacy and 'aliveness' of the stage to me is far more enjoyable and I love getting into the story. Films for me are just light entertainment, watched then forgotten basically. I can admire the acting skills though of any actor despite what he thinks about things outside of his /her work.



I'd disagree with that.  Just because a couple of them on there may be liberal, I'd agree with alot of his assessments.  If he was trying to slam Hollywood liberals, you'd see Sean Penn on there or Tim Robbins.


----------



## punisher73

Steve said:


> Nicholson was awesome in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Few Good Men, Shining, As Good as it Gets, and Easy Rider, off the top of my head.
> 
> I agree with Caver regarding DiCaprio. I like him and he's getting better as he gets older. I put him in the category where most actors/actresses fall. They don't make good movies bad, but aren't good enough to make a bad movie good. If that makes sense. He's solid... neutral.
> 
> Clooney was terrific in Up in the Air. But he's at his best when he's playing a rackish rogue, as in Ocean's 11, or quirky comedy, like Oh Brother Where Art Thou. Is he going to win an academy award any time soon? Maybe not, but that doesn't make him over rated.



I think that was the author's point.  Clooney is really good when he plays the same type of character such as in Ocean's 11.  All of the Nicholson movies you listed were good movies and Nicholson did a good job, but if you look at the type of character in each of those it is very similar to how it was played, which is basically a mean prick in all those movies.

But, I think overall, that is what most actors/actresses do.  They end up playing the same types of roles over and over because that is what they are good at and what the director wanted.

Not on the list, but also not heralded as a great actor is Vince Vaughan.  The man has made an ENTIRE career of playing the exact same character in every single movie.


----------



## granfire

Sorry, but anybody who puts tom hanks on that list is smoking dope.

Cast Away SUCKED. but I suppose everybody is entitled to a bad movie once in a while....


----------



## Steve

punisher73 said:


> I think that was the author's point.  Clooney is really good when he plays the same type of character such as in Ocean's 11.  All of the Nicholson movies you listed were good movies and Nicholson did a good job, but if you look at the type of character in each of those it is very similar to how it was played, which is basically a mean prick in all those movies.
> 
> But, I think overall, that is what most actors/actresses do.  They end up playing the same types of roles over and over because that is what they are good at and what the director wanted.
> 
> Not on the list, but also not heralded as a great actor is Vince Vaughan.  The man has made an ENTIRE career of playing the exact same character in every single movie.


I would agree, accept that he put Dustin Hoffman and Merril Streep on the list, two actors who have demonstrated astounding range over decades of work.  That kind of undermines his entire message.

Just to be clear.  I think these kinds of articles are fun because they generate discussion.  Particularly when they're easily disputed and poorly reasoned, like this one.


----------



## granfire

Steve said:


> I would agree, accept that he put Dustin Hoffman and Merril Streep on the list, two actors who have demonstrated astounding range over decades of work.  That kind of undermines his entire message.
> 
> Just to be clear.  I think these kinds of articles are fun because they generate discussion.  Particularly when they're easily disputed and poorly reasoned, like this one.



heck, the kid wasn't alive when 90% of the people on his list worked...

:lfao:


----------



## Twin Fist

this


punisher73 said:


> I'd disagree with that.  Just because a couple of them on there may be liberal, I'd agree with alot of his assessments.  If he was trying to slam Hollywood liberals, you'd see Sean Penn on there or Tim Robbins.




if the list was just to make points against liberals, why include people long dead who's political stances are unknown like tracy and peck?

no, the fact is the list is spot on with most of the selections.

Jack nicholson is crap, and has played the same character over and over since terms of endearment.

meryl strep is a great actor, but cannot play a likable woman....

clooney? crap to the second power. ONE character, he just plays it over and over.


----------



## Twin Fist

i do disagree with hanks. I think Hanks is a very good actor.


----------



## Steve

Twin Fist said:


> i do disagree with hanks. I think Hanks is a very good actor.


Hanks is crap.  One character he just plays over and over.   Which is a legitimate criticism of most actors.  Very few are true chameleons.  

So, in most cases, it's not whether an actor is good or bad.  It's more whether you like the character they happen to play.  For example, Clooney vs Hanks.  I like Clooney and don't like Hanks.  Objectively, they're both character actors who have made their fortunes largely based upon their likability.  Question is, do you like their particular character?


----------



## granfire

Steve said:


> Hanks is crap.  One character he just plays over and over.   Which is a legitimate criticism of most actors.  Very few are true chameleons.
> 
> So, in most cases, it's not whether an actor is good or bad.  It's more whether you like the character they happen to play.  For example, Clooney vs Hanks.  I like Clooney and don't like Hanks.  Objectively, they're both character actors who have made their fortunes largely based upon their likability.  Question is, do you like their particular character?



I take you don't like him, but you can't say he is playing the same character over and over.

He does need a good villain, sure, but nah, he is versatile


----------



## Steve

Hanks?  He plays a lot of different roles, but he plays them all the same.  He's right in there with Keanu Reeves.  Sure, Keanu was in Much Ado About Nothing, but he played that role the same as he played the kid in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, which is also how he played Neo.

Same with Hanks.  He's one part vulnerable, one part introspection, two parts sensitive and a dash of masculinity.


----------



## granfire

Steve said:


> Hanks?  He plays a lot of different roles, but he plays them all the same.  He's right in there with Keanu Reeves.  Sure, Keanu was in Much Ado About Nothing, but he played that role the same as he played the kid in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, which is also how he played Neo.
> 
> Same with Hanks.  He's one part vulnerable, one part introspection, two parts sensitive and a dash of masculinity.



put down that pipe

Reeves and Hanks in one breath, I know you are smoking!
:lfao:


----------



## Omar B

Firstly, dramas suck and I hate them so that eliminated most of that list.  I watch movies to have a good time so it's action, comedy, sci-fi, fantasy.  So from that list I actually like Clooney, he's got a Cary Grant vibe which I dig, but my list of actors hews closer to 80's action movie stars.


----------



## mook jong man

I don't mind actors that always play the same type of parts , at least before you see the movie you pretty much know what you are going to get.I like Gary Busey , he's no pretty boy , he might not be the worlds greatest actor and a he's a bit of a fruit loop , but he's pretty good at what he does ,which is playing dangerous sociopaths.


----------



## Sukerkin

I think a lot of the apparent disagreements between people in this thread is that we are forgetting there is a difference between an 'actor' and a 'film star'.  For example, John Wayne was a terrible actor (well, that's not being fair but it's just to illustrate the point) but an awesome film star - he was 'John Wayne' in pretty much every film he did.  The same with Clint Eastwood (who is a good director in my book) or James Coburn.  One of my great favourites is Jimmy Stewart, who perhaps managed more than most stars to strip the shackles off and do some real acting, as did Henry Fonda.

Sometimes that clash between a desire to 'act' and the demands to be a 'star' can be very destructive to a person - Monroe springs to mind immediately on that score.


----------



## Buka

Acting is a difficult profession. It's one thing to "act" a different way than you are, but when you are doing it for money it's a different story. When you carry it out to acting at it's professional zenith - which is what we're talking about, it's harder still. So let's look at what was said "over rated actors of all time."

Over rated - how, exactly? By popularity? Can't be that, this list comprises some of the most beloved actors by the movie viewing public of all time. You and I might not like some of them, but the people that pay for movies do. They adore them.
 By box office success? Can't be that, either. The actors listed were money making machines, they were conglomerates. I don't care much for Leonardo, but Titanic, which he had the lead in, made over a billion dollars just on video and dvd rentals alone. By recognition from the industry in which they work? Look up the academy award nominations, and the number of Oscars, it's mind boggling. 

So, over rated how?


----------



## Twin Fist

well, we can all agree that tom cruise? rubbish


----------



## MA-Caver

Sukerkin said:


> I think a lot of the apparent disagreements between people in this thread is that we are forgetting there is a difference between an 'actor' and a 'film star'.  For example, John Wayne was a terrible actor (well, that's not being fair but it's just to illustrate the point) but an awesome film star - he was 'John Wayne' in pretty much every film he did.  The same with Clint Eastwood (who is a good director in my book) or James Coburn.  One of my great favourites is Jimmy Stewart, who perhaps managed more than most stars to strip the shackles off and do some real acting, as did Henry Fonda.
> 
> Sometimes that clash between a desire to 'act' and the demands to be a 'star' can be very destructive to a person - Monroe springs to mind immediately on that score.


Cor, mate! On that note then let us not forget these folks; Sean Connery, Lawrence Oliver, Rex Harrison, Julie Andrews (who made us feel good with laughter and music), Gary Oldman (talk about versatility and a chameleon), Oliver Reed, Arthur John Gielgud, Judeth Anderson, Judi Dench and practically everyone else on this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_people#Actors_and_actresses... t'up! Pip, pip cheerio and all that what?


----------



## Tez3

"Arthur John Gielgud"?  That's Sir John Gielgud surely and Dame Judi Dench, Sir Sean Connery, Sir Lawrence Olivier etc

They are all stage actors first and film stars second, as I said real actors come from the stage.


----------



## Twin Fist

Tez3 said:


> "Arthur John Gielgud"?  That's Sir John Gielgud surely and Dame Judi Dench, Sir Sean Connery, Sir Lawrence Olivier etc
> 
> They are all stage actors first and film stars second, as I said real actors come from the stage.



what a load of rubbish.

sean connery a stage star?

get thee to a 12 step program.

FAST....

oh, and regarding the tendancy od bristtish stars to act on stage, you know what they say "when you aint pretty enough for the movies.............."


----------



## Steve

Jesus Christ. Really?  So, in order to be a real actor you have to be a stage actor?  And, what's been strongly implied is that in order to be a Stage actor you have to be British?  

Sean Connery isn't a great actor.  He's a terrific film star, by Sukerkin's definition.  

FWIW, I put him in with Tom Cruise.  They both pick, for the most part, great roles.  From time to time, they both put out some great work.  Tom Cruise was TERRIFIC in Last Samurai, and I appreciate the strength of his performance more each time I watch the movie.   Even at their worst, neither makes a good movie bad or a bad movie worse.  If anything, they are neutral or actually improve the movie they're in.  

But neither is what I'd call a GREAT actor.  Good movie stars, though.


----------



## MaxiMe

Dude needs to change his Diaper before he talks about "all time".
So MT who's the best top 10 of all time? hmm?

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?99849-Ok-10-best-by-category&p=1444006#post1444006


----------



## Sukerkin

I'd agree about Sean - fabulous star but, as I noted when I tried to show the difference, he's Sean Connery in everything he does.  Please note that I'm not saying being a film star is a bad thing because clearly it isn't.  

You will note tho', despite John's interjection, that most of the 'stars' aspire to act on the stage because they know that is where the real work is done.  Oh and yes, most of the best actors are British, ones who have honed their craft the hard way ... so stick that in your Hollywood-Sign-Shaped colonial pipe and smoke it .  There are some notable exceptions of course, for, with so many people or different backgrounds to draw from there have to be some decent American actors.

Oh and to complete my disagreeing with everyone phase, I happen to like the movies Tom Cruise makes on the whole - Last Samurai is one of my most watched films of all time .


----------



## MA-Caver

I never said or thought that Cruise was a "great actor" ... he's good when he's given specific roles but as a greatest of all time lister... umm... no.

As for Sir Connery... he *did* star on stage prior to film. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Connery#Career... but ennyway he's Scot and not British, and according to his tattoo he's damned proud of it too.


----------



## Buka

Speaking of Sean Connery, gotta love this fight scene.


----------



## Tez3

Twin Fist said:


> what a load of rubbish.
> 
> sean connery a stage star?
> 
> get thee to a 12 step program.
> 
> FAST....
> 
> oh, and regarding the tendancy od bristtish stars to act on stage, you know what they say "when you aint pretty enough for the movies.............."




Wow, back, rude and missed the point already. I was pointing out that they had titles. You know, the 'Sir' bit and that it's Sir John Gielgud not 'Arthur John Gielgud' as was written 
It's a shame you can't disagree with people without being nasty with it.


Sir Sean Connery is British btw hence the knighthood.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Wow, back, rude and missed the point already. I was pointing out that they had titles. You know, the 'Sir' bit and that it's Sir John Gielgud not 'Arthur John Gielgud' as was written
> It's a shame you can't disagree with people without being nasty with it.
> 
> 
> Sir Sean Connery is British btw hence the knighthood.


I thought he was Scottish.


----------



## Tez3

Steve said:


> I thought he was Scottish.



He's Scottish and British lol!


----------



## MA-Caver

Tez3 said:


> Steve said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought he was Scottish.
> 
> 
> 
> He's Scottish and British lol!
Click to expand...

 Scot by birth, Brit by acclimation/knighting from the queen.


----------



## Tez3

MA-Caver said:


> Scot by birth, Brit by acclimation/knighting from the queen.



What? Scotland is part of both the United Kingdom and Great Britain since the Act of Union in 1706. It may have it's own government since 2000 but it's not an independant country yet. The Queen can't make people British citizens by knighting them. Sir Sean has always had a British passport since he's always been a British subject having been born one.


----------



## ballen0351

Jim Carrey I HATE his movies I dont find him funny at all.


----------



## Tez3

ballen0351 said:


> Jim Carrey I HATE his movies I dont find him funny at all.




I don't think he is either but if I say that people think it's odd! He makes me cringe.


----------



## elder999

Big Don said:


> Seriously? It doesn't take a lot of acting skill to shoot people, blow things up and act like a badass...
> It must take work to KEEP the accent after all these years...



he depends a lot on his supporting cast, but he's shown moments of almost Cary Grant like charm and comedic timing in movies like _Twins_ and _Kindergarten Cop._

And I just love _True Lies_, and can't think of anyone else playing it (at the time it was made, anyway....)


----------



## Sukerkin

Mmmm ... Jamie Lee Curtis ... {startles}  Oh sorry, was just having a 'True Lies' flashback that lead in turn to a 'Trading Places' flashback.


----------



## ballen0351

Tez3 said:


> I don't think he is either but if I say that people think it's odd! He makes me cringe.


Yep same here alot of my friends think he is  funny.  When I say he sucks they think Im nuts.  Maybe I need new friends.


----------



## billc

I think Jim Carrey's problem is he goes way over the top to get the laugh.  If he pulled back a little he might be funnier.


----------



## MA-Caver

Tez3 said:


> What? Scotland is part of both the United Kingdom  and Great Britain since the Act of Union in 1706. It may have it's own  government since 2000 but it's not an independent country yet. The Queen  can't make people British citizens by knighting them. Sir Sean has  always had a British passport since he's always been a British subject  having been born one.


Oh yeah? Tell that to William Wallace... LOL It is reputed that Connery  *ahem* Sir Connery has a tattoo that reads Scotland Forever! 



ballen0351 said:


> Jim Carrey I HATE his movies I dont find him funny at all.


I've seen a few of his movies and at best given it a mild chuckle. Friends around me (like yourself) were rolling. Made me wonder if my sense of humor had worn off... I realized that it didn't, thankfully. Never really caught any of his "serious" films unless you want to count Truman Show. Either way, he's going to be listed as one of the funniest of all time in someone's (clueless) list sooner or later if he isn't already. 
I only remember laughing aloud at him when I first saw him on a HBO Rodney Dangerfield Young Comedians Special. I believe at the time it was his first _televised_ appearance. He morphed his face into several well known actors and it was bloody brilliant. Beyond that... nothing more than a mere chuckle or two.

[yt]hb4t3wzL058[/yt]   [yt]RbIq-f1_Dr4[/yt]


----------



## Sukerkin

MA-Caver said:


> Oh yeah? Tell that to William Wallace... LOL It is reputed that Connery  *ahem* Sir Connery has a tattoo that reads Scotland Forever!



That's because Sir Sean is professionally Scottish, you only have to watch any film he's in to realise that - he still doesn't have a Scottish passport tho' ... he has a British one because that's what he is.  Giving them a separate parliament was a terrible idea, too much blood was spilt to unite the country to give it away because it seemed politically expedient at the time.  But that's a whole other thread ...


----------



## Tez3

MA-Caver said:


> Oh yeah? Tell that to William Wallace... LOL It is reputed that Connery *ahem* Sir Connery has a tattoo that reads Scotland Forever!
> 
> 
> I've seen a few of his movies and at best given it a mild chuckle. Friends around me (like yourself) were rolling. Made me wonder if my sense of humor had worn off... I realized that it didn't, thankfully. Never really caught any of his "serious" films unless you want to count Truman Show. Either way, he's going to be listed as one of the funniest of all time in someone's (clueless) list sooner or later if he isn't already.
> I only remember laughing aloud at him when I first saw him on a HBO Rodney Dangerfield Young Comedians Special. I believe at the time it was his first _televised_ appearance. He morphed his face into several well known actors and it was bloody brilliant. Beyond that... nothing more than a mere chuckle or two.



William Wallace was 500 years before the Act of Union. England was joined to Scotland when Elizabeth the first died and Mary Queen of Scots son James inherited both thrones. Old as Sir Sean ( actually it's Sir James) is he's a bit younger than either of these events.


----------



## granfire

Sukerkin said:


> That's because Sir Sean is professionally Scottish, you only have to watch any film he's in to realise that - he still doesn't have a Scottish passport tho' ... he has a British one because that's what he is.  Giving them a separate parliament was a terrible idea, too much blood was spilt to unite the country to give it away because it seemed politically expedient at the time.  But that's a whole other thread ...



I am guilty of pushing the rain off the tracks here...

but isn't a large part of the political spectrum London centered, so much of the countryside does not feel like they are adequately represented? (meaning that nationality aside, it might be more beneficial to the region than being guided by bigwigs from far away?


----------



## Josh Oakley

Steve said:


> Hanks is crap.  One character he just plays over and over.   Which is a legitimate criticism of most actors.  Very few are true chameleons.
> 
> So, in most cases, it's not whether an actor is good or bad.  It's more whether you like the character they happen to play.  For example, Clooney vs Hanks.  I like Clooney and don't like Hanks.  Objectively, they're both character actors who have made their fortunes largely based upon their likability.  Question is, do you like their particular character?



This I can't get behind at all. The Davinci Code, Saving Private Ryan, Forrest Gump, The Terminal, Turner and Hooch. 

These are all one character? I call BS.


----------



## Josh Oakley

Tez3 said:


> William Wallace was 500 years before the Act of Union. England was joined to Scotland when Elizabeth the first died and Mary Queen of Scots son James inherited both thrones. Old as Sir Sean ( actually it's Sir James) is he's a bit younger than either of these events.



Mildly confused. Are you saying that Sean Connery's first name is James? Because I'm pretty sure it is Thomas.


----------



## Josh Oakley

MA-Caver said:


> Oh yeah? Tell that to William Wallace... LOL It is reputed that Connery  *ahem* Sir Connery has a tattoo that reads Scotland Forever!
> 
> 
> I've seen a few of his movies and at best given it a mild chuckle. Friends around me (like yourself) were rolling. Made me wonder if my sense of humor had worn off... I realized that it didn't, thankfully. Never really caught any of his "serious" films unless you want to count Truman Show. Either way, he's going to be listed as one of the funniest of all time in someone's (clueless) list sooner or later if he isn't already.
> I only remember laughing aloud at him when I first saw him on a HBO Rodney Dangerfield Young Comedians Special. I believe at the time it was his first _televised_ appearance. He morphed his face into several well known actors and it was bloody brilliant. Beyond that... nothing more than a mere chuckle or two.
> 
> [yt]hb4t3wzL058[/yt]   [yt]RbIq-f1_Dr4[/yt]



Do take the time to see _Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind_. I think it would be well worth your time.


----------

