Films/DVD Asylum

actors who play themselves

216.7.36.49

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email Next ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ] [ FAQ ]

Albert B. Broman

(i)

Tommy Lee Jones and Robert Duvall are two actors who I feel have little range. It seems that when I watch Duvall I am always watching "Santini". I still like movies like "The Apostle". Any comments. Any actors you think fill this "bill".
Regards,
Brotherman

Follow Ups:

Re: actors who play themselves - ishmael 13:14:08 08/19/01 (0)
If you want to look back a few years, I always found Sidney Poitier playing himself. For example, he had a thing about playing with his food that appeared in a few movies.
Re: actors who play themselves Bruce from DC 15:18:07 06/26/01 (1)
Well there are certainly folks who fill that bill. But I would not put either of these men in that category, least of all Duval. Maybe you need to watch the Godfather. Then tell us that Duvall is "playing himself" there and also in "Apostle."
I'm glad that you brought that film up, because I thought it was truly extraordinary. Not only for Duval's performance, but for Farah Fawcett's. Farah Fawcett, wet tee shirt poster girl and Charlie's angel! Who'd a thunk it? Wow. I wouldn't have.
Not to mention that "Apostle" is the only Hollywood film I've seen dealing with Christian religion, especially Southern, revivalist, evangelical Christianity, that betrays some understanding of the subject and doesn't look down on it.
I just can't say enough good about this film. I would love to have it on video.
- Re: actors who play themselves Dmitry 02:17:50 06/27/01 (0)
  I cannot but agree with you on Duvall(see my post below).
  Did you know that he made The Apostle with his own money, since noone in Hollywood would touch the script? It is the most uplifting film I have seen lately. I should watch it again!
  If you remember, he was in To Kill a Mockingbird, another landmark film.
  Duvall is probably near 70 or so. I wish he makes one more film as great as The Apostle.
I think you are asking the wrong questions... John_N 00:19:16 06/26/01 (4)
You have to ask why a certain actor continues to play his characters in a similar way. Has the actor agreed to play this role in a particular way by choice? Does he feel he is choosing roles that he can develop from his own strengths as an actor with the inherent limitations of the part? Has he chosen a role expecting to be given the oportunity to stretch himself as an actor to go beyond the surface level of the character part? Has his expectation to develop as an actor been aborted by the film director, who has already made a decision regarding his expectation from that actor? Has the actor been so typecast that he is accepting these dreary roles only with the hope that an opportunity to show "his stuff" may, someday be given to him by a keen director?
I think you are mistakingly suggesting that the actor has more say in how a part is played than is really the case.
I always thought it was the director's call on what of the actor's performance actually is kept in the film.
Really, the only way for an actor to "grow" as a performer is to accept a wide variety of roles. Think of Robert Dinero and Mel Gibson, for example, and you already know what their character is most likely to be. Neither are likely to be portrayed as cerebral types, because the movie would have to spend a lot more time on character development to make the roles credible to the movie audience.
John_N
- Re: I think you are asking the wrong questions... - Ishmael 13:17:54 08/19/01 (0)
  If you want to see an actor who is a true chameleon, watch "Kind Hearts and Coronets". Sir Alec Guiness plays five or six different characters, each unique and convincing. Peter Sellers also had this gift. Today, a good example of this is Ian McKellan.
- Re: I think you are asking the wrong questions... Albert B. Broman 19:59:39 06/28/01 (0)
  Duvall doesn't need to have a say, because both the actor and the director know that he is "Duvall" and they both know what he will bring to the role when is is hired. Or you don't hire Duvall.
  Duvall in Mockingbird, what year was that? What year did he make Godfather, 1973?
  What I meant to say and did not articulate, is that today the man has become a parody of himself. I just don't see much role difference between
  1) the preacher in Apostle(an intimidating preacher who slaps his wife around, kills, and does the good ol' boy shuckin' and jiven' routine?),
  2)Santini (a pilot who attempts to intimidate everyone while doin' the shuckin' and jivin' routine)
  3)the aircav officer in Apoc. Airborne, ha.
  4) crusty ol cowboy in Lonesome Dove.
  I see great similarity in those roles.
  Duvall likes to travel to Argentina where he spends time dancing the "hormonal" tango. Kissinger referred to Argentina as the spirtual home of "machisimo".
  Duvall is machisimo. That is why he goes to Argentina. That is why every role he plays is that of a macho man. Always.
  Regards,
  Brotherman
  Van Dyke Parks "Clang of the Yankee Reaper"
- Re: I think you are asking the wrong questions... caa 19:11:10 06/27/01 (1)
  > > Think of Robert Dinero and Mel Gibson, for example, and you
  > > already know what their character is most likely to be
  This is a misleading statement regarding De Niro. If people pay him an obscene amount of cash to play a mobster, then it's not his fault (and I'll still see it). But this does not reflect his ability to play *any* character. Some evidence, just on top of my head:
  - Meet the Parents
  - Goodfellas
  - Bronx Tale
  - This Boy Life (De Caprio is great too)
  - We're no Angels
  - The Untouchables
  - King of Comedy
  just to name a few... DeNiro does have a kind of texture that makes him memorable.
  - Re: I think you are asking the wrong questions... John_N 22:42:42 06/27/01 (0)
    > > This is a misleading statement regarding De Niro
    Sorry, if I offended you. I had no intention of slighting Robert De Niro. I have enjoyed all his movies that I have seen.
    My point is the same one you made; that actors do not have the final say in how they are presented on screen. I only used this actor's name as it was in the initial post. The director has the final say on what he wants from the actor during the filming, and still takes another run at it at the final editing stage as the movie concept is crafted into the final product.
    I still say that to judge an actor's versatility and talent from a few (possibly typecast) roles can severely misrepresent said actor's skills and potential. Lack of opportunities can also be a factor as we all know that there are many actors out there but very few choice roles available.
    I hope I have clarified my initial post.
    John_N
Jean Gabin... Dmitry 23:46:13 06/25/01 (0)
...was always the same in all the films of his that I have seen. But great!
Duvall is a very good actor, who, unfortunately is stuck with mostly Southern type-cast roles. He was in that dreadful "Gone in 40 seconds" film.I wish I could see him do King Lear.
Tommy Lee Jones is also type-cast, but I think he enjoys and deserves that. One good role in The Fugitive, and he still plays it. Correct me if I 'm wrong.
Re: actors who play themselves Victor Khomenko 21:55:15 06/25/01 (0)
That is hard to say. This has been said about SOOOO many actors... Jack Nicholson, and many others. But take Jack - yes, you will see a lot of him in every role, but "Profession: Reporter" and "Whitches of Eastweek"? Jack playing himself in both of these?
I could not disagree with you more on Duval - simply one of the best, the most versatile actors today. One can say he always plays a redneck, but even if that is true - all those rednecks are not just different, they are all REAL...
In short, I have been through similar discussions thousands of times, and now when it comes up again - I cringe.
I guess the actor is the same if you see him that way.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

You can not post to an archived thread.