Ed Norton in American History X

waterford1988

Just finished watching this film for at least the tenth time and it still touches me. It is an unbelievable piece of film making with the flashbacks taking part in black and white really adding to the film. My favourite aspect of this film is Ed Nortons performance. It is simply breath taking to be honest. How he was not even nominated for an oscar for this role is beyond me. It is one of the best performances in a film I have ever seen.

Anyone agree?

keefg

waterford1988 wrote: »

Anyone agree?

Yep.

nyarlothothep

Yes it is simply excellent as the performance is very real without any vestiges of acting.

Mikeyt086

I also agree.

Boston

Shame ed norton turned into such a mediocre actor afterward though.

acmj2007

I agree, I think he is a fine actor, his role in American History X was fantastic:)

Slimity

Agreed, fantastic performance in a brilliant film.

thebiglad

Boston wrote: »

Shame ed norton turned into such a mediocre actor afterward though.

What about 25th hour - also an excellent movie, well acted by Mr Norton.

Handsome Bob

One of my favourite films, and one of my favourite performances. Such an intense performance.

Boston

thebiglad wrote: »

What about 25th hour - also an excellent movie, well acted by Mr Norton.

Ok, films which have a mediocre/terrible performance by norton:

1. The Italian Job (2003) .... Steve
   ... aka Braquage à l'italienne (France)
2. Keeping the Faith (2000) .... Father Brian Finn
3. Red Dragon (2002) .... Will Graham
   ... aka Roter Drache (Germany)
4. Death to Smoochy (2002) .... Sheldon Mopes / Smoochy the Rhino
   ... aka Tötet Smoochy (Germany)
5. The Score (2001) .... Jack Teller
6. The Incredible Hulk (2008) .... Bruce Banner
7. The Painted Veil (2006) .... Walter Fane
8. The Illusionist (2006) .... Eisenheim

acmj2007

I thought he was very good in The Painted Veil!

Expresso Bongo

Wasn't Norton locked into some sort of contract whereby he'd have to do several 'safe' studio-pictures before he could go do more interesting stuff? I guess if you do enough crap you get comfortable with it and decide it's easier keep it up than taking a rist. Same thing with Ewan McGregor. Ever since he started those Star Wars movies nearly everything he does is just pointless big budget rubbish.

MikeC101

Boston wrote: »

Shame ed norton turned into such a mediocre actor afterward though.

Don't think that's fair to say. Perhaps more accurate to say his judgement in the movies he took roles in might have suffered...

Bearing in mind while some of the below movies may be mediocre at best, I consider his performance to have been good.

Fight Club
The Score
Red Dragon
25th Hour
Kingdom of Heaven
The Illusionist
The Painted Veil (I'm really surprised by you considering his performance in this as mediocre/terrible)

I though he was decent in The Incredible Hulk too.

MagicMarker

One of his best roles, alongside Fight Club and Primal Fear.

ziedth

MikeC101 wrote: »

Don't think that's fair to say. Perhaps more accurate to say his judgement in the movies he took roles in might have suffered...

Bearing in mind while some of the below movies may be mediocre at best, I consider his performance to have been good.

Fight Club
The Score
Red Dragon
25th Hour
Kingdom of Heaven
The Illusionist
The Painted Veil (I'm really surprised by you considering his performance in this as mediocre/terrible)

I though he was decent in The Incredible Hulk too.

I agree its very easy to back over an actors career and pick out a number of turkeys (Bar maybe for Christian Bale) there are not many actors given his age that have as many very very good performances as his such mentioned above and I also thought he was very very good in rounders and the film primal fear with Richard was IIRC his first major role is prob up there with American history x IMO.

JP Liz

I thought he was nominated for an Oscar for American History X

He is a great actor one of the best of his generation

waterford1988

Just checked it out there, he was actually nominated but was beaten by Roberto Benigni in life is beautiful.

Completely agree. norton was fantastic. the oscars are crazy. the people that get nominated sometimes... like robert downey jr in tropic thunder- WTF?!?

MikeC101

[quote=[Deleted User];61557044] the people that get nominated sometimes... like robert downey jr in tropic thunder- WTF?!?[/QUOTE]

He was good in that role - really good in fact. Why not nominate him?

Boston

Because he's a junkie and shouldn't be held up as a roll model to society... just guessing like.

MikeC101

Boston wrote: »

Because he's a junkie and shouldn't be held up as a roll model to society... just guessing like.

Cos that's what the Oscars are about, picking role models for society

Boston

Well it sure as hell isn't about talent. I hear Wacko Jacko is being nominated.

MikeC101

While politics and hype certainly have their place in Oscar selections (maybe more so in the best film and director category I'm inclined to think), I'd consider them to be pretty good in their best actor selections.
Just taking the 2000s, it's a pretty decent list

* 2000 Russell Crowe - Gladiator as Maximus Decimus Meridius
* 2001 Denzel Washington - Training Day as Alonzo Harris
* 2002 Adrien Brody - The Pianist as Wladyslaw Szpilman
* 2003 Sean Penn - Mystic River as Jimmy Markum
* 2004 Jamie Foxx - Ray as Ray Charles
* 2005 Philip Seymour Hoffman - Capote as Truman Capote
* 2006 Forest Whitaker - The Last King of Scotland as Idi Amin
* 2007 Daniel Day-Lewis - There Will Be Blood as Daniel Plainview
* 2008 Sean Penn - Milk as Harvey Milk

Sir Gallagher

Boston wrote: »

Because he's a junkie and shouldn't be held up as a roll model to society... just guessing like.

Since when are actors supposed to be held up as role models to society?

Expresso Bongo

Expresso Bongo wrote: »

Wasn't Norton locked into some sort of contract whereby he'd have to do several 'safe' studio-pictures before he could go do more interesting stuff?

ziedth wrote: »

I agree its very easy to back over an actors career and pick out a number of turkeys (Bar maybe for Christian Bale) there are not many actors given his age that have as many very very good performances as his such mentioned above

Yes, sometimes even the best, most "indie" actors work to live rather than live to work. He's been producing and directing, maybe he needed to finance other things.

I didn't care much for Keeping The Faith but Motherless Brooklyn (where he plays a NY detective with Tourette Syndrome) seems much more his style.

ziedth wrote: »

(Bar maybe for Christian Bale)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238112/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0253556/

Penn

I thought he was good in The Incredible Hulk. But agreed, Fight Club and American History X have been this 2 best performances in my opinion

missingtime

Isn't this movie completely different from the version that the director wanted released.

Bubs101

Boston wrote: »

Well it sure as hell isn't about talent. I hear Wacko Jacko is being nominated.

Right, because in an awards ceremony that recognizes musical contibutions the King of pop is an untalented man.

Karl Hungus

MikeC101 wrote: »

The Illusionist

Seriously? I thought he was the worst thing about that film, his performance was so flat and characterless. Both Rufus Sewell and Paul Giamatti acted circles around him.

Honestly, I think Norton can be a terrific actor when he wants to be, his performance in the 25th hour was excellent. But he really does just dial it in a lot of the time, Red Dragon was a perfect example of this, his Will Graham was so completely dull and characterless.

Boston

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Since when are actors supposed to be held up as role models to society?

Nevertheless, they are.

Bubs101 wrote: »

Right, because in an awards ceremony that recognizes musical contibutions the King of pop is an untalented man.

By all means give him a musical award, the oscar they're talking about is for a recent documentary performance.

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Seriously? I thought he was the worst thing about that film, his performance was so flat and characterless. Both Rufus Sewell and Paul Giamatti acted circles around him.

Honestly, I think Norton can be a terrific actor when he wants to be, his performance in the 25th hour was excellent. But he really does just dial it in a lot of the time, Red Dragon was a perfect example of this, his Will Graham was so completely dull and characterless.

Illusionist was a god damn joke, especially when compare to prestige. Red dragon was lucky to have fiennes in it, blond boy nortion had no screen presence. The child did better acting.

Sir Gallagher

Boston wrote: »

Nevertheless, they are.

If society held actors up as role models since the birth of movies, we'd all be fcuked.

I agree with you on Norton though, very overrated actor although superb in American History X.

purple_hatstand

I have to say, I find AH-X a bit formulaic, 'Hollywood', simplistic even....Norton is excellent in it, though - as he is in most of his roles.

My favourite Norton performance is probably his truly balls-out turn in 'Primal Fear'.

The best films he's been in (IMO) are 'Fight Club', '25th Hour' & 'The People vs Larry Flint'.

I also liked 'The Painted Veil' which Toby Jones stole - brilliant performance from him!

And special mention for 'Death To Smoochy':P

Boston

There was a time when actors where seen as scum of the earth, akin to beggars, grave robbers and lawyers.

In truth I don't agree with it being about anything other then acting talent. However, if you're going to award wacko Jacko just because he was an inspiration to millions, then surely you can no longer claim its only about the talent.

Greyfox

waterford1988 wrote: »

Just finished watching this film for at least the tenth time and it still touches me. It is an unbelievable piece of film making with the flashbacks taking part in black and white really adding to the film. My favourite aspect of this film is Ed Nortons performance. It is simply breath taking to be honest. How he was not even nominated for an oscar for this role is beyond me. It is one of the best performances in a film I have ever seen.

Anyone agree?

Yeah completely agree, one of the best acting performances in the history of cinema imo, superb film!

Omly watched the score recently and thought he was very good in it, his brilliant in fight club as well!

Jar_421

ziedth wrote: »

(Bar maybe for Christian Bale) .

Once again I must remind the Bale lovers of his fallibility. No one remembers this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0162650/

It's ignored for good reason I know but he still made it.

Norton is usually meh IMO, he has a few stand outs in which he is really good but alot of his roles at least anything i've seen him in lately it hasn't been a character, its just been Ed Norton.

purple_hatstand

Jar_421 wrote: »

Once again I must remind the Bale lovers of his fallibility. No one remembers this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0162650/

It's ignored for good reason I know but he still made it.

Norton is usually meh IMO, he has a few stand outs in which he is really good but alot of his roles at least anything i've seen him in lately it hasn't been a character, its just been Ed Norton.

I've never met Norton, but I would doubt he is much like any of the characters he's played.....and they are not even much like each other

I remember Matthew Perry being asked if there were any similarities between himself and his 'Friends' character, Chandler. And he replied, "well.....we do kinda look like each other." I wonder is this what you mean?

And I understand neither the fascination with Christian Bale nor his relevance in a conversation about Ed Norton (Bale, btw, was 4th billed actor and not a producer on the redundant, risible 'Shaft' remake. While he didn't 'make' the film, he undoubtledly trousered a hefty chunk o' wedge at it's producers' expense.)

speedboatchase

His physical transformation in the film is incredible as well, strange how he could go from completely intimidating in AH yet believable as a weakling at the start of Fight Club

Tony Kaye hates the cut of American History X released, he felt that Norton was completely wrong for the part and when Norton began editing the film at the behest of New Line Kaye went off the rails completely. His trade ads from the time are legendary and while I do like the film I would love to see Kaye's cut. He may be an egotistical, nut bag but the one thing that he is not is a hack.

seanybiker

Boston wrote: »

Shame ed norton turned into such a mediocre actor afterward though.

True that.

uncleoswald

Jar_421 wrote: »

Once again I must remind the Bale lovers of his fallibility. No one remembers this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0162650/

It's ignored for good reason I know but he still made it.

And lets not forget:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438488/

I really fail to understand why he jumped into another franchise, one that was bound to be a shallow mess, while still been so involved with Batman. Maybe if he was just going to do it for the money and throw in a light performance but he took the movie far too seriously and he came out of it worse then anyone else involved, even naked arnie.

Re: Norton
I watched Down in The Valley (thumbs up) recently and as usual he is really good in it. But I have the same problam watching Norton as I do with Meryl Streep; really great actors they may be but I can see the strings. I think its a bit of a ****ty criticism as I don't think they can do anything about it but I can always see them act, see them thinking ahead and calculating their performances. On stage it would be grand but on film it always takes away from it for me.

Basq

I don't think Norton could ever be considered a mediocre actor.. at least in my eyes!

He's just been picking poor film roles of late.. but from what I've seen of his recent releases, he always puts his best into them (he certainly outperformed Bana's 'Hulk' in 'The Incredible Hulk').

laoisforliam

missingtime wrote: »

Isn't this movie completely different from the version that the director wanted released.

Apparently Norton edited the film to give himself a more prominant screen presence in hope of winning an oscar, so the director now disowns the film..

Delighted that he didnt win an oscar for it!!

Hank Scorpio

Enjoyed his performance in rounders too

MikeC101

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Seriously? I thought he was the worst thing about that film, his performance was so flat and characterless. Both Rufus Sewell and Paul Giamatti acted circles around him.

Missed this post somehow.

Yeah I liked him in it - I really enjoyed the movie, so my opinion may have been coloured by that. I thought he was great - I'd say restrained and aloof rather than flat and characterless, which I thought suited the character perfectly, but your mileage may vary