Amdi Peter wrote:
Nicolas Cage.
Awful.

Amdi Peter wrote:
Nicolas Cage.
Awful.

Agreed.Zimmer wrote:
No, you see, now people are just being stupid.
Just because Tom Cruise is a cunt and a worthless wankshaft, that doesn't mean you should brand him as a shit actor. Because the fact is. He isn't.
He may not be Kevin Spacey standard, or Jack Nicholson, but he does pull off his roles just fine.
He was very very good in Collateral, and anybody who says differently is just a tool. He was good in Valkyrie, he pulled it off, and whilst another actor may have been better, he managed very well and made the movie pretty entertaining.
He was FUCKING FANTASTIC in The Last Samurai (and if you haven't seen that movie, I suggest you go watch it)
He was VERY good in A Few Good Men. He put on the role very well and really gave the movie something to watch for, other than just the plot.
He was also good in Magnolia.
Anybody who says he's a shit actor is just a douche. You are ignorant film critics. Very ignorant ones.
John Cena.DrunkFace wrote:
Who ever the 'marine' is. (some WWE douche)
Jolie is a good actress, but she's a typical city actress and should pick her roles accordingly. I think her acting in the Bone Collector was pretty decent. In e.g. Tomb Raider she was shit, and that wasn't just the movie, she is also just unsuited for such a role.Zimmer wrote:
NO. I did.Finray wrote:
Yeah that was extremely good.SamBo wrote:
That one where his whole life was a TV show was good
Truman show it was called, Miggle said it already.
I don't think Jolie is that bad. She's pulled off some very convincing roles. Such as Changeling.
Butlers acting was perhaps the most possitive aspect of the movie. You can make a wonderfull movie about the efforts of the Laconian rear guard at Thermopylae, just don't make up stuff like monsters and other weird shit.Zimmer wrote:
300 was a terrible movie, but it wasn't because of Butler. It was because the filming was shit, the story was terrible, it was badly executed and it was the wrong choice of actors. Not Butlers fault it was miserably poor.Miggle wrote:
hello.I'm Jamesey wrote:
You're kidding me? King Leonidas? hello?
300 was a terrible movie.
Exacly he's the new Jean Claude or Seagall, he just seems to have more brains than the latter and is much more aware of his own 'succes through sarcasm'. I mean:Finray wrote:
Vin Diesel is my guilty confession.. Every film he's in is sorta like MW2 - bad storyline, full of plot holes.... but tonnes of explosions, guns, and just .. really fun to watch.
troll moarSamBo wrote:
Oh Batman Forever kicked ass as well when he was the Riddler
Sydney wrote:
Arnold Schwarzenegger

AgreedMiggle wrote:
Michael Cera
Last edited by Pug (2009-12-07 11:30:54)
I dunno, he's been better in his newer grittier films. Blood Dimond for example.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Leonardo DeCaprio
I couldn't sit through Blood Diamond. The show sucked, as did his acting. I can't remember the movie he just did with Russel Crowe, I think it was called Rendition, or something like that, but his acting in that was just terrible.M.O.A.B wrote:
I dunno, he's been better in his newer grittier films. Blood Dimond for example.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Leonardo DeCaprio
I thought he was great in Catch Me if You Can. Tom Hanks, not so much. Hell, Walken was even pretty good in that film.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
I couldn't sit through Blood Diamond. The show sucked, as did his acting. I can't remember the movie he just did with Russel Crowe, I think it was called Rendition, or something like that, but his acting in that was just terrible.M.O.A.B wrote:
I dunno, he's been better in his newer grittier films. Blood Dimond for example.Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Leonardo DeCaprio
As far as I'm concerned, DeCaprio couldn't act his way out of a wet paper bag.

She acts? That's like saying extra # 4238 in the Titanic-sinking sequence is a bad actor.AussieReaper wrote:
http://www.newfaces.com/blog/uploaded_i … 733030.jpg