Actors who failed to live up to their potential (1 Viewer)

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Jennifer Jason Leigh and Lily Taylor are at the top of my list. Not pretty enough for Hollywood?
Vincent D'Onfrio?

And some TV stars that had a lot of potential but have done little since:

Gillian Anderson?
Dana Delaney?
Patricia Wettig?

 

[Haggai]

Just watched one of my favorites again recently, The Usual Suspects, and I was reminded again of how much I loved Gabriel Byrne's performance in that movie. He hasn't done much of anything since then that I've had any interest in seeing.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Starred in a Broadway revival of A Moon for the Misbegotten a few years back, and he was great. I wish he'd do more theater.

M.

 

[Holadem]

--
H

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Ahhh yes, Mary Louise Parker should have been on my list too.
Sure they are doing Broadway but they sure arent getting the movie roles they deserve.

 

[Kevin M]

Holadem, I believe his point was also that you claim Ali sucked...without ever seeing it. How do you know? You haven't seen it.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Here's two more I thought of...

Ione Skye.
Meg Tilly.

 

[teapot2001]

"by most accounts (never saw it)" is referring to "sucked, but Smith nailed the role."

~T

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

She does have a regular role on The West Wing.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Ali was great, Will Smith was great. People went in expecting to see Rocky, and instead, they saw a deeply personal character study with some boxing thrown in.

As far as actors not living up to their potential, E.T. was certainly slumming in those insurance ads during the super bowl a few years back. I know he's probably rich, but he hasn't done much since 1982, except for a cameo in Phantom Menace and those daily appearances at the Universal theme parks. Maybe he's just typecast in the "friendly alien" role, like Leonard Nimoy, and can only get work playing himself.

Another actor I haven't seem much of is the Dilophosaurus from Jurassic Park. She would have been good in Charlie's Angels 2 or Mona Lisa Smile. Why can't she find work?

 

[Michael Reuben]

Consider the possibility that some of these performers prefer the stage. Movies are not the be-all and end-all of acting. The question posed in this thread is whether various actors are "living up to their potential". Any actor who's successfully playing eight shows a week to a full audience certainly qualifies.

Brian Dennehy, who has plenty of experience in both media, made an interesting observation in an interview when he was doing Long Day's Journey last year on Broadway. He said that movie acting pays much better, but you're treated like a child. Stage work, OTOH, is an adult's job.

M.

 

[Rob Bartlett]

Stage acting is a lot more difficult, but probably better those who appreciate effiency. On the other hand, one gets tired of repeatition. But I think the reason movie buffs (especially technocentric ones) don't taking stage acting particularly seriously is because, well, if the bottom rungs of the acting heiarchy (like John Stamos) can get good roles, then the image of legitmate theater is that of a Hollywood with less resources. (Which quite frankly is the case sometimes.)

Btw, I believe Dennehy is performing Long Day's Journey here at Trinity, Rhode Island's resident (and very prestigous) theatre.

Also, would Hugh Jackman be squandering his talent on The Boy From Oz? It's not a very good play, but Jackman is stunningly magnificent in it. Would a better written play not be able to tap into the innate energy he possesses? By the same tolken, imagine Johny Depp plaing say, Lowell Bergman in The Insider. Now, The Insider is a much better movie then Pirates of the Carribean. Yet would Bergman be a more memorable performance then Pirates of the Carribean? So is there a line between having a great project and having a great role?

As for Fraser, George of the Jungle was his induction into stardom, he had never a major player with that much clout anyways. Besides, it's a cute movie. It's not the be all-end-all of movies, but there are worse things to have your kids force you to watch. He didn't do George of the Jungle 2, so he does have some set of standards, or at least a very expensive one. I might have done Looney Tunes back in action as well, Joe Dante has a track record many of us can stand behind. Monkeybone, if done right, could have been one of the all-time cult classics. It was by Henry Sellick, who directed The Nightmare before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach.

On paper, Fraser has the kind of career I can really admire. He doesn't do a movie thinking about what it could do for him, or wat awards he will get, or if it adheres to some strident, self-absorbed concept of art. He does movies that he thinks "hey, it would be pretty cool to be in".

 

[Ernest Rister]

"Stage acting is a lot more difficult, but probably better those who appreciate effiency. On the other hand, one gets tired of repeatition. But I think the reason movie buffs (especially technocentric ones) don't taking stage acting particularly seriously is because, well, if the bottom rungs of the acting heiarchy (like John Stamos) can get good roles, then the image of legitmate theater is that of a Hollywood with less resources. (Which quite frankly is the case sometimes.)"

I'll take John Stamos on stage over Justin Guarini on screen, thank you.

 

[chris winters]

so what are those rumors about faruza? Enough with the teasing, lets hear the dirt! I think part of the problem lies with the lack of vision and creativity present in too many casting meetings/casting directors. It also has a lot to do with the buisiness side of things, marketing etc...A film student may see the brilliance of casting say tim allen in the role of hero in a serious crime drama over bruce willis, but from a marketing and buisiness stand point that choice is a no brainer. Bruce wins. A movie truly is a product, a widget and nothing more to a whole side of holliwood that we tend to forget about. Moviemaking is very much a buisiness. Buisiness people are generally speaking not the most creative people on the planet, and definately not usually risk takers for the sake of artistic expression. You have to show them an actor can sucsessfuly (which mean money maker in there myopic terms) pull off a certain kind of role and then that said actor will be used again for that role. One thing to remember is that if a studio could make the exact same succsessful movie for 30 years they would do it in a heartbeat. To them its a can of coke, and if it is succsessfully consumed then make more of it. The problem is thats not realistic so they make almost the same 4 movies over and over again instead. Actors age, and new faces inhabit the parts etc but thats the basic gist of it. If you were a holliwood executive in charge of casting would you bet your carear, what you have dreamed of and worked you whole life for, on a less safe casting choice? Becuase if your wrong, or even unjustly blamed for a films faliure then its over for you. No more BMW, nor more trendy aprtment off sunset, no more premiers. Most people working in the studios have a tentaive enough grip on their carear tragectory as it is, why risk it all? The other side of it all is damage control. As far as Cuba is concerned im sure he makes a hell of alot of money with those cheezey disney flicks, and to him he has won the lottery. He lucked into a couple meaty roles early on in his carear and then cashed out to coast for awhile. Personally I love creative casting, as do most more serious moviegoers. Tarantino is great at this, as are others. Using a performers vibe in offbeat ways can yield tremendous results. TV can somtimes give an actor more of a chance to diversify as they stakes are smaller and turn over quicker.

 

[Brian W.]

Actress who started out with HUGE successes and then her acting career just tanked: Diana Ross.

She is a great talent as an actress. With no formal training, she managed Best Actress Oscar nominations for her first two movies, "Lady Sings the Blues" and "Mahogany." Many considered her the favorite to win for "Lady Sings the Blues," but Liza Minelli won for "Cabaret" that year. "Mahogany" is lousy B-picture, laughable camp by today's standards, but she does give a very good performance.

She only ever did one other theatrical movie, though, the flop "The Wiz." I don't know what happened. I suspect her only doing films for Motown, all produced by Barry Gordy, was a bad move. Maybe she didn't get any other offers, I don't know. I think her race also could be a factor. It's harder for black actresses in particular to get roles -- just ask Angela Basset.

But I also speculate she may have insisted on creative control over her own films, something I've noticed with the handful of TV movies she's done. "Executive Producer: Diana Ross." None of them were very good, and I wouldn't be surprised if she had a hand in making them not very good... just like her music career tanked when she started producing herself.

 

[Ernest Rister]

I thought her performance in her latest "I'm not drunk, officer" police video was quite entertaining, if not entirely convincing.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

OK, going a bit OT here, but this might amuse you. It's an article on Jim Hill Media called Brendan Fraser in "George of the Jungle 2" ?! Fat chance !! that talks about why he didn't want to come back for George 2, how he wanted to do a cameo, and some of the ideas they had for explaining both his cameo and his absence. It's a pretty funny read, and would have been quite amusing in the movie (I haven't seen George 2, so I can't comment on the value of the final film). Worth a read.

(Hopefully the link works - the main home contents page will open first, but hopefully the article will appear after a short time. If it doesn't, go to the archives page and search for the article, posted October 22, 2003.)

 

[Rob P S]

Dee Wallace Stone - from E.T. to B-movies.

Mary Stuart Masterston - she seemed to be in every other movie released in the early 90's, but hasn't done much since except Lifetime movies.

Annabeth Gish - highly praised for Desert Bloom, so what was she doing in a Shaquille O'Neal movie (Steel)?

Jesse Bradford - superb at age 14 in King of the Hill, now he does stuff like Clockstoppers and Swimfan.

I agree about Mary-Louise Parker, and Alfre Woodard, Kathy Bates, and Joe Morton are three more of my favorites who should be getting meatier roles.

 

[TheLongshot]

Well, that's the problem when you get old enough to play teens, is that there aren't too many quality roles there.

Actually, Haley Joel Osment not doing a huge amount of roles is probably a good thing for him. It keeps him from being Macaully Culkin, who just got used up and thrown away.

I also think Brendan Frasier has fashioned a fine career for himself. While he might not be in the greatest films ever, he always seems to do well in them.

Another actress who I was kinda disappointed didn't do more films was Karen Allen. I've always enjoyed her in "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" and "Scrooged", but she wanted to do things other than films...

Jason

 

[dpippel]

Not to drive this into the ground, but your comment isn't well worded. Reading it says to me:

* The film Ali sucked.
* Will Smith was great in Ali.
* I've never seen the movie.

That's where my post was coming from.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled program...