Is there any Actors that havent made a bad movie ? [** NO LISTING **]

Gamb!t

One that stuck out was Edward Norton who had a good run til he made the Hulk.

TeddyTedson

DiCaprio is close,
I wouldn't imagine so though.

John Cazale, he only has a small CV due to his untimely death but what a series of films to star in.

newmug

Kevin Bacon. Nothing too awful.


And of course, our own Brendan Gleeson.

bedrock#1

newmug wrote: »

Kevin Bacon. Nothing too awful.


And of course, our own Brendan Gleeson.

footloose.....

Gleeson carries every movie he's in!

Watched the guard last night "I thought all drug dealers were black or Mexican?"

starbelgrade

I don't think any actor can span a whole career without the odd dud film, but in terms of being close to perfection Steve McQueen, Paul Newman and Robert Redford have all had exceptionally good filmographies.

neaideabh

Gamb!t wrote: »

One that stuck out was Edward Norton who had a good run til he made the Hulk.

Was actually thinkin Norton myself when I saw the thread title but then didn't realise he was in Hulk! Never saw Hulk but can imagine its not of the same calibre as his other movies!

PunkFreud

Gamb!t wrote: »

One that stuck out was Edward Norton who had a good run til he made the Hulk.

I don't rate Norton too much. When I saw him in American History X I was so disappointed. I rated him as an actor before that, but he was average at best. Controversial, but I find him an averaage actor who's good at picking scripts.

Galvasean

Deleted User wrote: »

John Cazale, he only has a small CV due to his untimely death but what a series of films to star in.

+1 stellar (albeit small) CV. Quantity over quantity.

As for Ed Norton, the Incredible Hulk is very good as far as Incredible Hulk movies go...
That said, he had a small role in The Invention of Lying which was quite poor.

Hank_Jones

These days I would think that Ryan Gosling comes about as close as is possible.

Wasn't a big fan of Stay or Fracture, but that's just opinion.

You would be hard done by trying to find an actor working today without a bad film under their name.

The majority of actors these days eventually sell out for the pay days and with the amount of films being made,
it increases the possibilites of them being in terrible films.

Jesus Wept

Daniel Day Lewis is probably the only one trying.

Mellor

PunkFreud wrote: »

I don't rate Norton too much. When I saw him in American History X I was so disappointed. I rated him as an actor before that, but he was average at best. Controversial, but I find him an averaage actor who's good at picking scripts.

Primal Fear, The People vs. Larry Flynt, Rounders, American History X, Fight Club

All good movies, and he is great in all of them. They were 5 of his first 6 movies. I didn't see the other so can't comment, was a Woody Allen pic so could very well be class.

newballsplease

[QUOTE=Galvasean;75048910As for Ed Norton, the Incredible Hulk is very good as far as Incredible Hulk movies go...
That said, he had a small role in The Invention of Lying which was quite poor.[/QUOTE]

Surely that can only be classed as a cameo role. So I wouldnt really count it.

Allthough I saw his film The illusionist and hated it. Other may love it tho.
Hes a great actor tho.

Monty Burnz

newmug wrote: »

And of course, our own Brendan Gleeson.

Lake Placid? Awful. He was still good though.

Monty Burnz

Deleted User wrote: »

John Cazale, he only has a small CV due to his untimely death but what a series of films to star in.

Wikipedia:

During his six-year film career he appeared in five films, each of which was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture: The Godfather, The Conversation, The Godfather Part II, Dog Day Afternoon and The Deer Hunter.

al28283

Gamb!t wrote: »

One that stuck out was Edward Norton who had a good run til he made the Hulk.

Keeping the faith was pretty bad

johnny_ultimate

Most actors and directors go into a film with the best of intentions. When it emerges as a dud, it's not necessarily in their control. Filmmaking is a fickle pursuit. So you'd be surprised to find many actors who are extremely fond of films that are widely perceived as unsuccessful.

They do just take the paycheck from time to time of course. When you're Eddie Murphy, that's every time.

Monty Burnz

Actually, a much better question would be 'is there any actor who has never appeared in a good movie?' We might have to set some rules about longevity of career and such, to eliminate the guys who had a walk-on part in Plan 9 From Outer Space.

I was going to suggest Steve Gutenberg, but Cocoon was watchable, and Short Circuit was fun for the kids.

jonnysimples

Sean Penn

I'll admit to not having seen a lot of his very early stuff but the more recent stuff he's been in is very good.

Pronter

Denzel Washington, Al Pacino, De Niro, Morgan freedman.

All great films over the years :-)

hidinginthebush

I used to think Brad Pitt was such an actor until I saw "the Tree of Life" (I'm not trolling, I know this film has been been well received by some, I just didn't like it). Apart from that though, I can't think of a bad film he's been in that I've seen.

leonidas83

TOM CRUISE, what a legend, maybe born on the 4th of July was his worst one

saintsaltynuts

Tom Cruise i have to say has been in more good movies than bad.M.I.3,Jerry Maguire,Born On The Fourth Of July and Magnolia come to mind.

Eldoco

CHUCK NORRIS !!!! HE NEVER MADE A BAD FILM, IF IT AS BAD IT'S BECASUE HE WANTED IT TO BE !!!

hidinginthebush

saintsaltynuts wrote: »

Tom Cruise i have to say has been in more good movies than bad.M.I.3,Jerry Maguire,Born On The Fourth Of July and Magnolia come to mind.

What about Knight and Day? One of the worst films I've seen in a while.

Da Shins Kelly

I would go with Daniel Day Lewis, but then Nine wasn't very good. He acts so rarely though that any time he does it always seems to be enjoyable, regardless. Like someone said before, he's the only actor who seems to actively try to be in consistently excellent movies.

Galvasean

The-Rigger wrote: »

Daniel Day Lewis is probably the only one trying.

The only real blight on his CV in my mind is Gangs of New York. I'm sure there is a good cut of that film somewhere (there is allegedly a cut almost 5 hours long), but the one we got to see in the cinema was a bloody mess.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Lake Placid? Awful. He was still good though.

Lake Placid is an example of a genre movie (by 'genre' I mean big monster gone wild) done very well. It never tried to be Citizen Kane and managed to be enjoyable for the hour and a half that was in it with plenty of belly laughs (helped in no small part by Gleeson) and some cheap thrills.

DrumSteve

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Analyse That. :eek:

Meet the Fockers is the worst film i've ever seen.

FortuneChip

I'd lean toward DiCaprio. He's had some less than stellar movies, but he doesn't exactly have Turkeys on his CV.

Most of Ed Norton's earlier movies were great, but movies like Italian Job and Keeping The Faith were pretty poor. He was the weakest link in Italian Job, doubt he was even interested. I heard Stone was muck but haven't gotten around to seeing it.

Tom Hardy is starting to build a decent filmography in recent times. While Bronson wasn't everyone's cup of tea, he was superb in it. He's had smaller roles in movies like Rock'n'Rolla and Layer Cake. His new movie with Chris Pine "This Means War" will be his first step into the current Action/Romcom style movies (Knight & Day, Bounty Hunter etc) that all look the same, so I'd be curious to see if he can give us something better from them

Galvasean

FortuneChip wrote: »

His new movie with Chris Pine "This Means War" will be his first step into the current Action/Romcom style movies (Knight & Day, Bounty Hunter etc) that all look the same, so I'd be curious to see if he can give us something better from them

Ad Mr. & Mrs. Smith to that genre. a genre which needs to die quickly IMO. It just doesn't work

clig

Never seen a bad movie with Philip Seymour Hoffman in it though I haven't seen them all, I was gonna say Paul Giamatti but then I remembered Planet Of the Apes.....

foxyboxer

Gene Hackman. Endlessly watchable.

Never gives a poor performance.

FortuneChip

Galvasean wrote: »

Ad Mr. & Mrs. Smith to that genre. a genre which needs to die quickly IMO. It just doesn't work

Spot on, not a fan of them. Although the Ashton Kutcher one looked by far the most horrible of them (I avoided it). It's like they can't reach a compromise but instead try to both an Action Movie for 90 mins and a Romcom for 90 mins

al28283

Shiner11 wrote: »

Clint Eastwood, flawless.

He was in Casper

hidinginthebush

foxyboxer wrote: »

Gene Hackman. Endlessly watchable.

Never gives a poor performance.

While I agree with you there, I think Crimson Tide is pretty unwatchable after seeing Das Boot for the first time. I mean, sure there's a bit of tension and action going on, but it can't hold a candle to that masterpiece.

Busi_Girl08

Morgan Freeman.

Bruce Almighty is arguable, but I have yet to see Freeman in any role in which I have disliked him.

al28283

shay2010 wrote: »

Cillian Murphy

Tron Legacy was a dud

FortuneChip

al28283 wrote: »

He was in Casper

Really?

"I bet you're asking yourself did I shoot 4 Proton Beams, or 5?
Well, do you feel lucky Ghost?
Go Ahead Casper... Make My Day"

Apologies, I just IMDB'd... I honestly don't remember this happening...

al28283

FortuneChip wrote: »

Really?

"I bet you're asking yourself did I shoot 4 Proton Beams, or 5?
Well, do you feel lucky Ghost?
Go Ahead Casper... Make My Day"

It's brief but he's there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCcpOk5ni80

Galvasean

FortuneChip wrote: »

Spot on, not a fan of them. Although the Ashton Kutcher one looked by far the most horrible of them (I avoided it). It's like they can't reach a compromise but instead try to both an Action Movie for 90 mins and a Romcom for 90 mins

Cynical marketing:
Girls like romcoms.
Boys like action.
Ergo, we stick both in the same movie so they will go to them on dates.
Result: Profit!

and relationships that never got off the ground

Tea_Bag

Nicolas Cage?

trolololol


seriously though, I always look forward to Benicio Del Toro. great actor IMO.

4zn76tysfajdxp

FortuneChip wrote: »

Tom Hardy is starting to build a decent filmography in recent times. While Bronson wasn't everyone's cup of tea, he was superb in it. He's had smaller roles in movies like Rock'n'Rolla and Layer Cake. His new movie with Chris Pine "This Means War" will be his first step into the current Action/Romcom style movies (Knight & Day, Bounty Hunter etc) that all look the same, so I'd be curious to see if he can give us something better from them

Ah yes, but he was in Star Trek Nemesis so his CV's already tainted.

Sad Professor

No listing please, folks. That includes posting just a name or a title.

D'Agger

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Morgan Freeman.

Bruce Almighty is arguable, but I have yet to see Freeman in any role in which I have disliked him.

He's in a new movie coming out around now named "Flipper" that looks terribad

I saw he was in it and felt sad that he'd reduced himself to a movie that I guarantee will be pathetic.

To echo what's already been said - Ryan Gosling for me - I've started watching more of his movies lately and think he's a very good actor, has a good range with regard to the different roles he can play.

Barring that Di Caprio I suppose

paddyismaddy

foxyboxer wrote: »

Gene Hackman. Endlessly watchable.

Never gives a poor performance.

what about the crap film with ray romano

al28283

Gene Hackman's been in quite a few bad ones.

sbsquarepants

Hank_Jones wrote: »

These days I would think that Ryan Gosling comes about as close as is possible.
.

Have you seen drive? How it is possible to make a film about a stunt driver by day, getaway driver by night so bloody boring, is a total mystery!

Pronter wrote: »

Denzel Washington, Al Pacino, De Niro, Morgan freedman.

All great films over the years :-)

Maybe Denzel alright, but the rest have been in some crap.
Pacino is probably my favourite actor of all time but he's also the star of the only film i walked out of the cinema half way through. Simone - jesus what a pile of shíte
De Niro was in Rocky and Bullwinkle and several other turkeys
Freeman has been in dozens of crappy tv movies

Can't think of a bad Johnny Depp film off hand

ziedth

I can't think of Christian Bale in a terrible film. T4 and Reign of Fire were poor but not terrible IMHO. I'm sure there is one though.

After that, maybe Anthony Hopkins? He was in one with Chris Rock that was pretty piss poor IIRC.

Gamb!t

Galvasean wrote: »

The only real blight on his CV in my mind is Gangs of New York. I'm sure there is a good cut of that film somewhere (there is allegedly a cut almost 5 hours long), but the one we got to see in the cinema was a bloody mess.



Lake Placid is an example of a genre movie (by 'genre' I mean big monster gone wild) done very well. It never tried to be Citizen Kane and managed to be enjoyable for the hour and a half that was in it with plenty of belly laughs (helped in no small part by Gleeson) and some cheap thrills.

Gangs is a bit hit and miss with people,I actually liked it and I thought he was excellent in it.

DjFlin

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Have you seen drive? How it is possible to make a film about a stunt driver by day, getaway driver by night so bloody boring, is a total mystery!



Maybe Denzel alright, but the rest have been in some crap.
Pacino is probably my favourite actor of all time but he's also the star of the only film i walked out of the cinema half way through. Simone - jesus what a pile of shíte
De Niro was in Rocky and Bullwinkle and several other turkeys
Freeman has been in dozens of crappy tv movies

Can't think of a bad Johnny Depp film off hand

You think Drive was bad. And you can't think of a single bad Johnny Depp film. Really?

D'Agger

Gamb!t wrote: »

Gangs is a bit hit and miss with people,I actually liked it and I thought he was excellent in it.

Not a great movie overall but if there was one saving grave - it was DDLs performance imo