home subscribe
BackStage.com    Message Board Homepage  Hop To Forum Categories  Moderated Forums  Hop To Forums  The Working Actor    Great new talent
Page 1 2 3 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Great new talent Login/Join
 
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by gyokoren:
We had a pretty big name producer do a seminar at my school last month and he said that young American actors are on average MUCH better than they were even ten years ago. This is because of improvements in our training and the decreased cost of being able to get experience through student films, new media and producing our own indie work, etc.

That begged a question that a guy in my class had the balls to ask. "If young actors are so much better now, why do you keep showing us the same shitty boring people over and over again?" I felt queasy and wanted to hide but the producer just laughed and explained what should be obvious. It's all about money. Not the money from the box office but the money they have to raise to get the film made. Investors are very risk averse and demand that established names be attached to projects. He went on to say that they recognize they are working with an outdated business model that is starting to bend back on itself at the box office and they are not fooling themselves into believing that many people go to see movies because the actors they hyped as stars at a young age are in them. They need real stars and would love to break new actors in starring roles but it just isn't normally feasible in today's economic climate.

His advice was to keep doing quality work however you can get it and over time it will be like walking through a misty fog. You are just walking along and suddenly realize that you've gotten wet. They also see that and it will be when your time will come. Another thing he said that I thought was encouraging is that they know who you are if you are putting yourself out there and really have the goods. It's just a matter of when the time will come that they can use you. Just don't expect anything big to happen fast. It can but it is the exception and requires unusual circumstances.


That's exactly what we are talking about. There ARE great actors these days, no doubt. It just that they are not on the screen, because Kristen Stewart is there and there is no more space left.

What everybody thinks of Andrew Garfield?
 
Posts: 160 | Location: London, UK | Registered: August 26, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Marlon Brando
posted Hide Post
I'm not that into Andrew Garfield. Big props to him in hiding his British accent. I totally believed that he was American in "The Social Network." But otherwise, not wow-ed. He wasn't a very good Spiderman. He tried to hard to play up nerdiness.
 
Posts: 2759 | Location: LA,CA | Registered: May 06, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
Kristen Stewart - who has been acting for, like, ever - is actually a strong actor. I've never seen the neck-biters, but I have seen "Lost in the Wild", "Adventureland" and "On the Road". If she hadn't lucked into a megahit, I doubt anyone would question her talent.


Stanislav Meiner
author of "Acting In Hollywood: A Newcomer's Guide"
 
Posts: 135 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: January 31, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Kevin Bacon
posted Hide Post
I guess my opinion of Andrew Garfield is based more on his work in "Death of Salesman" on stage rather than his film work. That's where my opinion comes from.
I have always strongly disliked Kristen Stewart's work, long before she was even famous for Twilight. I consistently (in every film I've seen of hers) find her acting choices boring, safe, and just not bringing the script to life to its full potential.
I think her success primarily comes from the fact that awkward teenagers can project themselves onto her, being such a blank slate. Which in a way, can be sort of a kind of talent...getting out of the way and letting the audiences fill-in your character for you, but I've always found it uninteresting to watch. I can't sit through Twilight.
 
Posts: 25 | Location: NYC | Registered: December 01, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
quote:
I never really liked Ryan Gosling... **It was everything around Ryan that made him look good.


I never watched another Gosling film after his craptacular performance in The Notebook. One of the greatest love stories in the history of cinema has some of the worst acting in a love scene. He's the only one that didn't fit....

**James Garner, Gena Rowlands, and Rachel McAdams were all great.
 
Posts: 242 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: August 29, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Marlon Brando
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stanislav Meiner:
Kristen Stewart - who has been acting for, like, ever - is actually a strong actor. I've never seen the neck-biters, but I have seen "Lost in the Wild", "Adventureland" and "On the Road". If she hadn't lucked into a megahit, I doubt anyone would question her talent.

Though I haven't seen the others, Adventureland wasn't really acting for her. She is a stoner and she has cheated with a married man.
 
Posts: 2759 | Location: LA,CA | Registered: May 06, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Morgan Freeman
posted Hide Post
I am all for the 30 plus actors. The 40 plus are better and forward. The young ones do not hold well. I feel bad for them because they are being manipulated and soon burn themselves out or wake up one day wonder who they and ask where are they...And wish they had more control of their careers when they where being pushed.

Sorry that's how I see it.

I am for mature actors and indie films are good too!


-----

The Disciple that Jesus loves! (ME!)
----
Your closer to your success than you think!
----
www.imdb.me/marytennant
www.mary-tennant.com
 
Posts: 203 | Location: Boston, MA | Registered: December 25, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by TRUTHTELLER59:
Though I haven't seen the others, Adventureland wasn't really acting for her. She is a stoner and she has cheated with a married man.


Me-OW!!!


Stanislav Meiner
author of "Acting In Hollywood: A Newcomer's Guide"
 
Posts: 135 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: January 31, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sean Penn
posted Hide Post
I don't think Kristen is a total hack or anything. She's just decent and there are hundreds of actresses in Hollywood and New York her age that are just as good or better that don't have a pot to piss in and a lot of them are better looking. The question here is who got recognized as GREAT in the last decade?

Charlize Theron is the only one I can think of that broke into the great screen actress category in her 20s with "Monster" in 2003. She would have been 26 or 27 when she shot that but had also been doing great work in supporting roles in big films and leading roles in smaller films for a few years before. She def wasn't a newcomer. She is also the rarest kind of combination of talent and looks that exists in God's world. Total freak of nature. The funny thing is that even she would have been stuck with a life of pretty young thing roles if it weren't for J.J. Harris managing her career from the beginning. I saw an interview where she and J.J. said that the producers would have made "Monster" all about she and Christina Ricci making out if they had not gotten in on the production team! haha

I think Phillip Seymour Hoffman is the best American actor in cinema, but he was in his late 30s when he hit with "Capote" in 2005. Look at all the supporting roles he did before that.

Viola Davis is another great actress who had been around for years mainly doing theatre before she finally got recognized for throwing down with the Meryl in "Doubt." She was over 40.

Cate Blanchett is the only great I can think of that was under 30 and a total newcomer on the international scene when she hit with "Elizabeth" in the late 1990s, but even she was a star on Australian tv first.

P.S. If anybody wants to say that any of those actors are not great, I have nothing to talk to you about! haha
 
Posts: 94 | Location: us | Registered: September 25, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
gyokoren, I'm sure nobody is going to argue with you Smiler

I was just wondering if there is any GREAT talent that came into the screen in 00's? The ones you've mentioned, they were acting before.
 
Posts: 160 | Location: London, UK | Registered: August 26, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by toonaive:
gyokoren, I'm sure nobody is going to argue with you Smiler

I was just wondering if there is any GREAT talent that came into the screen in 00's? The ones you've mentioned, they were acting before.


Not sure what you mean.

Any GREAT talent with a breakout performance that led to a string of great projects had already been acting before, and often for a lot longer than most people will ever let on.

Even the young ones.

Those who "break out" in their 20s tended to have been pursuing acting since they were kids (or even as toddlers) - booking small roles and commercials.

From Joseph Gordon Levitt to Jennifer Lawrence to Jaoquin Phoenix to even the Twilight gang - they've been pursuing it since they were kids (or at least in their early teens). Even a lot of the Aussie actors you see have been acting a while in their home country before being "introduced" to the US.
 
Posts: 90 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: August 25, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
If you're talking 'new faces' in their 20s that didn't work much before, you'll find more of it on TV.

Michele Williams was a series regular/lead on Dawson's Creek, years before becoming one of the most respected young film actresses right now.

And then there's guys like Taylor Kitsch - I don't think he did much if at all before Friday Night Lights. And since then, he's been unfortunate to have been in too many big budget flops. Could be a case of the guy having leading man potential, but his agent/management team pushing him a bit too early because he's not yet seasoned/experienced enough to carry a film. Or just in hindsight choosing the wrong projects. It happens.

It'll be interesting to see what happens to the Glee kids and how their careers progress beyond the show, since for many of them, they didn't have a whole lot of experience before the show.
 
Posts: 90 | Location: Los Angeles | Registered: August 25, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Jack Nicholson
posted Hide Post
Kiera Knightly, although I recognize she's not everyone's cup of tea? Marion Cotilliard? Don't know how long she was around in France before she broke in the US...I'm guessing a long time.

Listen, the bottom line is that eventually ALL of this will go away...just like the opera did...just like live theatre is doing. Somewhere in the distant or not-too-distant future, movies will go away too. Everything will be interactive virtual reality.

Mae
 
Posts: 438 | Location: Midwest | Registered: March 11, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Russell Crowe
posted Hide Post
quote:
Everything will be interactive virtual reality.


Definitely not looking forward to that.
 
Posts: 160 | Location: London, UK | Registered: August 26, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sean Penn
posted Hide Post
quote:
Listen, the bottom line is that eventually ALL of this will go away...just like the opera did...just like live theatre is doing. Somewhere in the distant or not-too-distant future, movies will go away too. Everything will be interactive virtual reality.

I don't think that will happen any time soon and only on the level of mass entertainment when it does. Moviemaking as an art form is still in its infancy and its real potential has not yet even begun to be explored. Humanity has a need for the great artists and storytellers who have been with us for all of our history and this is our greatest medium since a great film involves a synergy of all the arts. Will it change? Yes. The economic model on which commercial films are made is unsustainable and I agree with donquixote that the days of the huge megawatt movie star being their selling point are coming to an end.

The thing is, it was never really about them. It is the great visionary directors like Kubrick and Godard and many more to come who will go down in history with the Shakespeares, Tolstoys, Picassos, Mozarts and Da Vincis. The actors will only be a footnote like Burbage to Shakespeare or a particular color in Monet's pallet. But there will be a need for us as long as there is a need to breathe real humanity into these creations. There just won't be as much money for the lucky few.
 
Posts: 94 | Location: us | Registered: September 25, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3  
 

BackStage.com    Message Board Homepage  Hop To Forum Categories  Moderated Forums  Hop To Forums  The Working Actor    Great new talent

© 2013 Back Stage. All rights reserved.