The worst actor working today
- Thread starter axlryder
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actor: Dane Cook. Mediocre stand-up comedians that rely on gags and props (or flailing your fucking arms around to let people know when to laugh) have to at least be able to deliver a line on screen with some concept of comic timing. Cook can't even do that. Even Dane Cook fans don't know when to laugh in Dane Cook movies without a physical cue because he's a comic actor that doesn't know how to be funny.
Actress: Megan Fox. You're in a movie to be hot. They help you out so much in that task that you actually get digital clean up for a feature length movie. How do you fuck that up? How do you drag down every scene you're in, when the only reason you're in the scene is to be hot? How do you act so poorly that you actually appear less attractive and more obnoxious the less clothes you wear and the more you bump and grind with the scenery?
I also noticed Nic Cage being mentioned just about every post, and what I would say to that is even though he gets paid to be crazy these days and doesn't do a lot of good movies anymore, he's been in enough good movies and received enough recognition for good roles that he doesn't deserve to be named in a thread like this. Same with Eddie Murphy. He's accused of playing the same character over and over and that's a valid criticism, especially since he let that last abomination of a comedy out. That said, in the 80's he had some damn good roles that make people like me wish he never forgot what funny was.
Actress: Megan Fox. You're in a movie to be hot. They help you out so much in that task that you actually get digital clean up for a feature length movie. How do you fuck that up? How do you drag down every scene you're in, when the only reason you're in the scene is to be hot? How do you act so poorly that you actually appear less attractive and more obnoxious the less clothes you wear and the more you bump and grind with the scenery?
I also noticed Nic Cage being mentioned just about every post, and what I would say to that is even though he gets paid to be crazy these days and doesn't do a lot of good movies anymore, he's been in enough good movies and received enough recognition for good roles that he doesn't deserve to be named in a thread like this. Same with Eddie Murphy. He's accused of playing the same character over and over and that's a valid criticism, especially since he let that last abomination of a comedy out. That said, in the 80's he had some damn good roles that make people like me wish he never forgot what funny was.
Almost every sports star or musician turned actor. Sure there is a slight overlap between the professions but many of them can't act for shit and rely on their audience consisting of screaming fangirls to hide the fact that they are playing a role that anyone off the street could outpreform them in.
I didn't get to see MWSTG, Horrible bosses looked, sounded, and has been widely reported to be awful. Never even heard of the other. So maybe Spacey's turned aroundaxlryder said:
But every Cusack movie you've listed was just terrible.
I am taking their tracklist into account, that's WHY they rate worse for me than Vampire Woodgirl and sweaty, well-used whore. Stewart and fox have never made a good film, nor performed well. Spacey and Cusack HAVE made good films, and done well in them, and have since made awful movies with worse performances than other, newer actors and actresses. So, today, they are WORSE than the others, because they will DISAPPOINT. Go into any film with Megan Fox. You can't be disappointed, because you know it will suck. You can only be disappointed she didn't get her tits out (Jennifer's Body made money because of this possibility), and not by the film or performance itself
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/horrible_bosses/8-Bit_Jack said:
that's not widely reported to be horrible, sorry. I saw it, it was fine. Also, Margin Call got excellent reviews
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/margin_call/
1408 was not the least bit horrible. It was old fashioned, psychological horror in the style of Hitchcock. Admittedly, it didn't reach the same level as Hitchcock's best films and also didn't reach its potential, but it was still pretty damn good. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1408/ Again, good reviews. Also, again, I'd defend The Raven. It's not as bad as people say, and I think it's because many missed the point of the film. As for Hot Tub Time Machine, it was an homage/commentary/parody to/on/of schlocky 80's comedy. It did its job. Also got solid critical reviews. I can see why you wouldn't like it (I didn't like it that much), but as far as comedy goes you can do much, much worse. My point is that they're not bad actors. To call them bad just because you're disappointed by them (even though they're not even making bad films, just some mediocre ones) doesn't seem fair. It's your opinion, of course, so I can't tell you you're wrong, but your reasoning just seems silly. For instance, I'm not suddenly going to say that Derrick Rose is the worst there is if he starts missing some lay ups even though he's still playing way better than the actual bad players. That's doesn't make any sense.
Notable eh?
-Marky Mark
His hilariously dull, stupid performance in The Happening nearly set acting back 10 years, and everything I've seen of him since has been bland, mediocre garbage. And now they want him to make MORE movies? ACTION movies? WHY?! There should be no instance, no single moment on God's Green Earth that should make me PINE for more Steven Seagal.
But this Jason Statham wannabe has somehow done it.
-Megan Fox
She isn't an actress; I refuse to call her an actress. She's the anti-actress.
She's a pair of tits with a nice ass that you put on the screen to make everyone else's performance look better (like, say, Shia of the Beef). That's the one role she's been given, and yet she has somehow still managed to make the job of "Camera slut" BORING.
I do not exaggerate when I say that the strippers and hookers Uwe Boll hired to play female roles in his early movies, were better than ANY performance I've seen out of Megan Fox.
Still, she's no longer an issue. After mouthing off to Michael Bay, I doubt she's going to find employment in anything remotely notable ever again. Good fucking riddance.
Honestly, I'd rather take Tommy Wiseau any day of the week over either of those two borefests. His acting is a trainwreck, but it's so unbelievably hilarious and awkward that it's entertaining.
-Marky Mark
His hilariously dull, stupid performance in The Happening nearly set acting back 10 years, and everything I've seen of him since has been bland, mediocre garbage. And now they want him to make MORE movies? ACTION movies? WHY?! There should be no instance, no single moment on God's Green Earth that should make me PINE for more Steven Seagal.
But this Jason Statham wannabe has somehow done it.
-Megan Fox
She isn't an actress; I refuse to call her an actress. She's the anti-actress.
She's a pair of tits with a nice ass that you put on the screen to make everyone else's performance look better (like, say, Shia of the Beef). That's the one role she's been given, and yet she has somehow still managed to make the job of "Camera slut" BORING.
I do not exaggerate when I say that the strippers and hookers Uwe Boll hired to play female roles in his early movies, were better than ANY performance I've seen out of Megan Fox.
Still, she's no longer an issue. After mouthing off to Michael Bay, I doubt she's going to find employment in anything remotely notable ever again. Good fucking riddance.
Honestly, I'd rather take Tommy Wiseau any day of the week over either of those two borefests. His acting is a trainwreck, but it's so unbelievably hilarious and awkward that it's entertaining.
Kristen Stewart was ok in Runaways and Adventurealnd, I seriously don't understand what people expect her to do with the role of bella in twilight.
Sam Worthington was decent in Terminator Salvation and I rather liked him in The Debt and Last Night.
Worst actor as of now is Megan Fox, although I liked her in Transformers because she was just an ass and pair of nice tits in there but she totally murdered her roles in Jonah Hex and Passion Play, in the last one she also effectively killed the whole movie.
Sam Worthington was decent in Terminator Salvation and I rather liked him in The Debt and Last Night.
Worst actor as of now is Megan Fox, although I liked her in Transformers because she was just an ass and pair of nice tits in there but she totally murdered her roles in Jonah Hex and Passion Play, in the last one she also effectively killed the whole movie.
Not that you were going just on this one performance, but I don't think it's fair to use The Happening as a benchmark for, well, anything. That movie was so bad, it dragged down everything and everyone involved in it. Even John Leguizamo, who is a quality character actor, floundered in a role in which he seemed to be required to have no character at all. You know, kind of like the way Lucas directs everybody he works with.Atmos Duality said:
True. The Happening would have been a trainwreck without Marky Mark.TheSchaef said:
And yeah, I remember how Lucas strained himself to suck every last ounce of personality out of Natalie Portman, Yuan McGregor and Samuel Jackson for the Prequel Trilogy.
Widely reported by people I KNOW, who share my tastes, to be awful. I've also seen 30 minutes of it, and thought it sucked.axlryder said:
1408 WAS terrible. Every bit of it. And it DID reach its potential, because there is only so much potential to be had from something based on Stephen King did in five minutes to illustrate a point about writing formula.
Hot Tub Time Machine was not funny. Even once. When your movie is so cliche that I have literally seen every scene and joke play out in fucking cartoons, you fail to amuse me. It was not an homage, it was a reshoot.
I have not seen the raven. I have, however, seen commercials and trailers for it. Trailers that betray an idiotic premise and john cusack at his most miscast. And a fundamental logic flaw that negates the idiotic premise.
Your comparison is also not apt. Firstly, my position is that the two actors WERE performing more poorly than other, lower tier actors. Secondly, my assertion was that the prior quality of their work (again, more spacey then cusack) and the appalling LOW quality now make a movie that much LESS enjoyable. Your basketball player, on the other hand, cannot make a bad game WORSE because he fails to play well. The game is bad BECAUSE he plays poorly. Cusack and Spacey, on the other hand, can not only drag a good film down, but also make a bad film LOOK like it could be good, then fail to try to turn out a decent performance, so now you are let down AND watching a bad movie
I'm sure Lebeouf is a nice guy in real life, but every character he's played has made me want to punch him in the face.Daystar Clarion said:
Tracy Morgan, i just can't stand the guy, whenever i see him in something he always plays the same exaggerated idiot, its so ridiculous and over the top that it's not even remotely funny. As for females.. I can't really think of any so i'll go with the one from twilight.
For those people saying Adam Sandler, go see Punch Drunk Love by P.T. Anderson. While it certainly doesn't absolve the shit that Adam Sandler has done previously (Grown Ups, Jack and Jill, Billy Madison, 8 Crazy Nights), it shows that even the supposed worst actors can show depth under the right direction.
Also for those saying Nicholas Cage. The man was in Adaptation (where he's capable of playing two distinct twin personalities), Leaving Las Vegas (where he won an acting oscar), Moonstruck, Raising Arizona, Kick-Ass, Bad Lieutenant (a personal favorite), Matchstick Men, hell even Drive Angry was enjoyable at parts. Has the man been in some shitty movies? Hell yes he has, Ghost Rider, Knowing, and Next suck shit through a straw. But even at Nicolas Cage's worst (Wicker Man remake) the man is never boring, which means he can't possibly be the worst actor. It's for this reason that I wouldn't add Arnold Schwarzenegger to this list either. Sure the man may be by all definitions a "bad actor", but he's given us quotable and hilarious lines for the last 30 years. Plus, he's the god-damned Terminator.
My vote would go to actors who are truly boring, offering nothing new or interesting to the roles that they play. Gerald Butler and either Jennifer Aniston or Kristen Stewart (somewhat stereotypical choice) fit this requirement perfectly.
Also for those saying Nicholas Cage. The man was in Adaptation (where he's capable of playing two distinct twin personalities), Leaving Las Vegas (where he won an acting oscar), Moonstruck, Raising Arizona, Kick-Ass, Bad Lieutenant (a personal favorite), Matchstick Men, hell even Drive Angry was enjoyable at parts. Has the man been in some shitty movies? Hell yes he has, Ghost Rider, Knowing, and Next suck shit through a straw. But even at Nicolas Cage's worst (Wicker Man remake) the man is never boring, which means he can't possibly be the worst actor. It's for this reason that I wouldn't add Arnold Schwarzenegger to this list either. Sure the man may be by all definitions a "bad actor", but he's given us quotable and hilarious lines for the last 30 years. Plus, he's the god-damned Terminator.
My vote would go to actors who are truly boring, offering nothing new or interesting to the roles that they play. Gerald Butler and either Jennifer Aniston or Kristen Stewart (somewhat stereotypical choice) fit this requirement perfectly.
You're still just throwing out your personal opinions without much criticism of the actual acting. I thought horrible bosses was okay. I've seen MUUUUCH worse films. I'm not going to argue the merits of it though, mainly because of the subjectivity of comedy. Same goes for hot tub time machine, while undoubtedly derivative (as is the majority of comedy), the premise was still amusing, the quality inoffensive and there was definitely as sense of meta awareness it carried that made it fairly watchable (assisted mostly by the film's intro). The Raven came off as more of a commentary on the genre than a straight faced film, so the premise itself took second fiddle to what the film was actually saying (in my mind), which made the film more watchable than just taking the whole thing at face value. Its problem was that it tried to be too many things, and ultimately failed at its superficial goals and belied the film's real meaning.8-Bit_Jack said:
You say 1408 was terrible but that opinion is not reflected by the majority of professional critics. Most importantly, Cusack put in a believable performance and managed to create drama and intensity without hamming it up too much. His acting progressed through the story in a logical way (embodying the stages of grief just fine) and you are literally the only person I know who would put that performance on the same level as the worst of the worst. The only part I really disliked was the ending, and the alternative "real" ending remedied that significantly, though still came off as hollow. Whether or not the film itself is derived from a brief short story is irrelevant. It's like saying Will Smith is a shitty actor because I am Legend is a bastardization of the written source (though I don't think Cusack's performance is on the same level as Will's)
Of course your position still makes little logical sense, as you're taking the "objective" quality of an actor and saying their work is somehow diminished by your own personal disappointment. I could just as easily saying that Derrick Rose playing "poorly" is all the more frustrating and disappointing because he showed so much promise and skill earlier. More importantly, even in the roles you claim are terrible, they still show a basic understanding of inflection/delivery, emotional tension, and character progression. The same can not be said of many other actors getting thrown around in this thread. I can at least understand why people mention Cage; he's played in a LOT of definite shit recently where he just alternates between crazy and bored. Also, your last point is almost contradictory to your earlier complaining against the films in question, as you made it sound like the films themselves were fundamentally flawed (unfunny jokes, entirely derivative, poor, stretched out premise), not the performance of the actors. Of course I'd disagree with you on those accounts too, but it doesn't seem like you have a very solid platform for finding these actors to be as remarkably bad as you claim.
When comparing all this to the likes of, say, Katherine Heigl
Yeah, as bad as some of his movies have been, he's been in some really good ones as well. I, for another, really enjoyed Adaptation.Hatchet90 said:
To put in my two cents about John Cusack... High Fidelity is by far one of my favorite movies of all time and the reason it was so good was because John Cusack was so incredibly believable in the role of Rob Gordon, and Jack Black being in the movie certainly didn't hurt either.