 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: posted by Victor Khomenko on October 01, 1999 at 14:26:23:
>>>Overall the movie is not really much, you take the two actors out and what is left is just bunk.<<<Unfortunately, that is true about too many movies today. But when you do have special chemistry between excellent actors, it can make an average movie into a great one. When the plot is bad but the cast is good, I tend to focus on the performances and tune out the rest. In many cases it can save the day.
Is the opposite also true by any chance? Can't remember any great movie with lousy actors... Maybe Barry Lyndon comes the closest... but then again, it maybe simply an another example how the great director can control and transform everything, including the actors.
Hmm, that's a tough one. Maybe Vertigo? Kim Novak wasn't much of a talent, and James Stewart was seriously miscast. In fact, it was said Hitchcock regretted his decision to use him. Later Stewart wanted the lead in North By Northwest, but Hitchcock naturally turned him down in favor of Cary Grant - a very wise choice. Then again, I don't know if you would call Vertigo a greart movie. Highly enjoyable, but great?Do you remember one of Hitchcock's early American efforts, The Trouble With Harry? Starring Shirley McLaine and John Forsythe. I saw it when it came out (that dates me) and have the tape somewhere. I recall enjoying it - as close to a comedy as Hitchcock ever made.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
