Of the newer crop of actors and actresses, who do you think is the most overrated?

For most overrated actor I'd have to say Leonardo DiCaprio

I absolutely fail to see any charisma ---or real acting ability--in Leonardo.I have no idea why he gets so much hype.There are far more talented (and good-looking) young actors around.

My vote for most overrated actress would go to Gwyneth Paltrow, although, unlike Leonardo, she can turn in a credible performance.Somehow she just leaves me cold.I find her acting rather superficial and shallow.

My vote is Tom cruise. I don't think he can act!!

------------------
Sandalwood's Cosmic Creations: Working with the magic of love....

As much as I've liked a number of movies that he's been in, I really don't think that Kevin Costner is a good actor.

-JM-

------------------
Growing older but not up…

Oh Jollymon he is sooo goodlooking tho

Caer

And a big ol' thumbs down for: Brad Pitt, Kevin Costner,and Woody Harrelson; the entire cast of "Friends"; Michael Douglas (a big ol' raspberry to him); and Matt Damon. I know, I know... it's a shame because they are all worth LookinG at, but they can't act to save their collective lives. As for MOST over-rated, I'd have to say Matt Damon. Is he the same in every movie I've seen or is that just my imagination? Well, at any rate, I just can't stand to watch him. (with the exception of one scene in "Dogma" that was well-written and well-acted. ...anyone can get lucky once. LOL) ...well, I know I'm not making any friends with that list... sorry.

------------------
...enjoying the journey...

Lindak29, I LOVE Michael D's love scenes. I would be in the picture in a moment!! With all this new technolgy, who knows, maybe one day I can just slide on in there with him. He really is a sexy man.

------------------
Sandalwood's Cosmic Creations: Working with the magic of love....

Is it that you really think that they can't act or that you just don't like these people because of the proliferation on media hype about them. (Or that you just don't like these people.)
I ask this because the people that ARE good actors know what it takes and aren't easily fooled. And almost universally the people that are listed on this post are the MOST respected by their piers and directors. Leonardo DiCaprio (who I have NO love for) is praied by actors and directors before AND after the films he's worked on. Same for Harrison, Paltrow, Damon and Douglas. And Cruise was able to "Fool" Paul Newman that he was a great actor (not an easy task...mission Impossible, I say).
I'm working on Kevin Costner's new film and he works as hard as anybody else I've ever had the pleasure to have worked with (Tommy Lee Jones, Linda Hamilton, Clint Eastwood, among others). He's professional and is as good as they come. (C'mon, if you weren't choked up watching Dances With Wolves or Field of Dreams, you're just not human)

[This message has been edited by Cohalen (edited 12-28-1999).]

You raise interesting points, Cohalen.As far as DiCaprio is concerned, I really think that he lacks depth and range as a actor.As someone once said (I think about Merle Oberon)--he runs the gamut of emotions from A to B.I have actually found that his performances detracted from some of the films he has been in.As for Paltrow, I think that I am being negatively influenced by the hype.I actually did enjoy her performance in Sliding Doors, and she did manage to convey some charm in Shakespeare In Love.I just don't think that she is the next Meryl Strep, and I find her less interesting to watch than someone like Claire Danes.In fact, there seems to be nothing about her that is extrodinary.At the same age, Jodie Foster was able to create more complete characterizations and make much more of an impact.
It may well be that an "actor's actor" does not necessarilly appeal to an audience member.Fellow actors and directors may base their praise on an entirely different set of variables.A case in point is Marlon Brando---who seems to be adored by his fellow actors--yet I feel that Brando has contributed a rather slender body of work.He was magnificant in three films--Streetcar Named Desire, On The Waterfront, and The Godfather--but three movies isn't a hell of a lot of great work (albeit the quality of those three films was outstanding), and I find the rest of his performances undistinguished.

What do people rave about with DiCaprio and Paltrow? I am really curious.

What aspect of filmmaking are you involved with?

Cohalen, for the record I loved 'Dances with Wolves' And 'Field of Dreams' AND 'Bull Durham' for that matter BUT that wasn't the question (we won't talk about 'Waterworld'). Personally, I think that these were great stories that really didn't require a great performance to make them what they were. I don't feel that the role played by the lead in any of these movies was all that challenging. I'm certainly not attacking Costner's work ethic, his character, or anything else about him other than the fact that I have yet to see him in what I would consider to be a really difficult role.

There are actors out there, although not a great deal, who can turn in a great performance in spite of a weak storyline, a slim budget, or lame supporting characters, but there aren't too many. As much hype and notoriety as Costner gets, I don't believe that it's based so much on his acting ability as on his ability to draw big at the boxoffice. Most of the really good actors that DO come to mind don't have the rugged good looks that Costner has and, as a result, have had to work just that much harder to obtain the same acclaim.

As far as Tom Cruise goes I think that his acting HAS improved, he took a big step forward in 'Born on the Fourth of July' but it would be hard to live up to the hype that he's received also. I guess that with all the press and exposure that a pretty face seems to attract, it really is difficult to back that up with the exceptional acting ability that you would expect someone that popular to possess.

Here's three more 'faces' that couldn't act if their lives depended on it; George Hamilton, Don Johnson, and Mark Harmon. Bad, bad, and worse!

-JM-

------------------
Growing older but not up…

Don Johnson. I don't care if he can act or not. Listen ladies, I used to date a photographer, and he had naked pictures of Don Johnson that he took when Don was just starting in the business. Some under a water fall and some others also. WOW!! let me tell you........

------------------
Sandalwood's Cosmic Creations: Working with the magic of love....

So then...what makes an Actor "an Actor" to you? If not his/her work ethic what?
Can they interpret a character? Do they do the research necessary to put flesh on the bones of a written character/ Do they create, from who they are (their tool) a "real" character.
The actor has somany things to overcome. First, control of their bodys/themselves. Useing all their combined accumulated experience, research and imagination to "guess" what the director and or writer will accept. Then they have to work with a script that may not be consistant (several authors/rewrites). Then they have to be chosen to do the role and work qith the directors vision. Kenneth Brannagh doesn't just come to the set and do what he pulls from his hat that day. (unless he's directiong something he wrote...and even then...) It's like playing ball on running water...EVERYTHING is constantly in flux. Good actors can handle that. Good actors can carry a movie at the box office.
And I still believe that being perceived as a good actor (or having acting ability) has less to do with the actors skill and it has to do with personal issues we have with the actors persona.
Marlon brando has had a hugh career and has influenced a generation of todays brightest actors who revear has abilities.
(check out his filmography on www.imdb.com (the best Movie database on the net, imho).
A lot of people use Waterworld as a touchstone for bad moviemaking. the reality was that it was a good film that didn't lose money. (Final budget 180 Mil. Worldwide gross over 300 mil)
I just think that we could did a little deeper to find "bad' actors. By the way, Jessica Lange was a "Bad" actress in her first two films. But then she applied herslf and Learned from some great teachers and peirs and recreated herself in to one of america's finest actresses. But there's always King Kong to show how bad she is. And that stops some people from looking further...looking for the good.
As to what I do, right now i'm earning income as a production assistant on "Thirteen Days", but I also do developement among other skills and I'm committed to producing my first feature this coming year. (One way or another...whatever it takes...stay tuned)

What makes a good actor for me, is someone who can create a believable character toward whom I feel some kind of emotion.And, when watching the film, I want to be more aware of the character than I am of the actor.I think that films still tend to produce "movie stars", who are box office draws, rather than great actors.Film is much more a director's medium than an actor's playground.Actors can be made to look good or bad by lighting, makeup, direction, editing, camera angles, and,of course, by the quality of the scripts.Not all that much acting ability may be required of a "star".Making films does not even require the ability to give a sustained performance--it is shot in small segments, often out of sequence, and one shot can be repeated innumerable times.I think that to see really fine acting you have to see an actor on the stage.Most great stage actors can translate their art onto the screen, but people who are predominantly movie actors often bomb out when they are put on a stage.Because of their backgrounds and training, the British actors have it all over the Americans.Anthony Hopkins has certainly been able to cross-over into commercially successful films, but others, like Jeremy Irons, seem to lack a really appropriate vehicle for their talents.Glenn Close is absolutely luminous on the stage and I would love to see her in more big-budget movies which would do her justice.I find most of the current crop of young actors rather vacuous.They do not create distinctive characterizations, and other actors could be substituted for them without altering the film much.The more we rely on special effects, and on an action-adventure format, the less focus there is on the actor to generate the excitement in a film.Consequently, I think, we are winding up with screen actors who can be made to look good through all kinds of artifice---but who are essentially neither real nor good actors.

the most overrated actors are: Matt Damon & Leonardo Dicaprio. As for, actresses: Jodie Foster & Jennifer Lopez.

Harrison Ford.He has the dullest,dryest personality,and has no right acting.Why he was named Sexiest Man Alive is beyond me!The judges must have been smoking something when they picked him!

I have to go with Leonardo DiCaprio as the most overrated actor!
I have to go with Chelseabelle on this one!

its funny, being a young adult male i am naturely supposed to hate the young popular actors that are better looking and and more successful than me. However, while i do hate leonardo and etc.., i think that Brad Pitt is a very competent actor. I have seen him cover a wide variety of roles and portray each conviningly.

An actor i think is terrible is keanu reaves. But he isn't really overrated cause from what i have heard everybody else thinks he sucks too, so i am confused as to why he still lands so many good roles. (i do however love the bill &Ted movies)

------------------
When life gives you a lemon, wing it right back and add some lemos of your own. -Calvin(Bill Watterson)

If an actor is good s/he is supposed to play just about any role.

The way I can tell whether so and so is a good actor is I imagine that actor playing another role in the same movie or another movie.

I can picture DeNiro in many movies and roles but I can't do the same for people like DeCaprio.

Those are the ones that are, in my opinion, overrated!

First, chalk up one more vote for Leo.

Secondly, I love the Calvin quote above!

Sandlewood, please elaborate. I dated a guy for a while who was the splitting image of Don Johnson.... sigh. No one has mentioned Mr Couldn't Act My Way Out Of A Wet Paper Bag - Keanu Reeves. I'm sure he's a lovely man, but an actor!?! Meg Ryan annoys me. She seems like a one note actress and I just want to slap her silly. Dunno, she gives women a bad name.

DiCaprio has actually done a very good job in a number of movies before the Titanic debacle. Specifically, he was excellent in both What's Eating Gilbert Grape? and The Basketball Diaries, roles he'd probably not touch with a ten-foot pole now that he's a superstar.

Most overrated-- Julia Roberts (actress) and Kevin Costnet (actor). Each has managed to make one decent film in their careers (Flatliners and A Perfect World respectively).

X

------------------
http://www.geocities.com/xterminalx

xterminal- its a good thing Iread your note first because I was just going to defend Leo using the same movies as examples. I would also add his role in This Boys Life. Those three films show some incredible talent and depth. Even Titanic. A lesser actor would have made the love story with Jack and Rose silly. When I saw it the first time it had me all the way thru. Whats Eating Gilbert Grape is a wonderful film and he's perfect in it. In The Basketball Diaries when he is outside his mothers door begging he is amazing.
I'm sure he has more great work in him.
My vote for most overated actor is Mel Gibson. Another cutie pie who is a one note actor. Fun to look at but boring too.
For women I have to say Cameron Diaz. Other than Being John Malkovich all I've ever seen her do is be the pretty blonde.

Add one for Keanu Reeves.

Just a point of interest for Chelsabelle; The actress referred to in your quote was Katharine Hepburn. I believe it was in reference to either her stage performance in Philadelphia Story or the film Morning Glory (which was pretty shallow, I admit).
As for the question at hand, I think Gwennyth (sp) Paltrow needs to go away, far away. And she should take that Ally McBeal chick with her! In the male arena, the ones I really detest are George Clooney (Three Kings notwithstanding) and Richard Gere. I don't even think they're pretty enough to count as eye-candy, so why sit through the bad acting?
On a positive note - Clare Danes rocks and Sam Jackson is both scenic and a good actor. My faves at the moment, though, are Kevin Spacey (of course!) and John Cusack (always!).

------------------
Whom does the Grail serve?

Ember!

John Cusack is the BEST EVER!!!

I would pay to watch him clip his toe nails!!

He's a guy who will be making great movies

until he dies. He'll never be boring.

Lloyd Dobbler, Martin Blanke, and Rob in

High Fidelity are some of the most

attractive,

sexy, funny, interesting men to grace a

silver screen.

John is just too cool....

------------------
~~The purpose of life is a life of purpose~~

I agree with Temujin on Brad Pitt having talent, but it depends on which movie. Did anyone ever see him in 12 Monkeys? I didn´t like the movie very much, but his performance was excellent (and I didn´t think he would have been able to pull it off)! And while we´re on the same movie, I think Bruce Willis has been over-rated far too long. Even in The Sixth Sense, he could have done a better job...the kid stole the show and made the movie in my opinion.

As for Kevin Costner...I don´t even think he´s sexy, let alone a good actor. Every movie I´ve ever seen him in he´s bored me to tears...especially Dances With Wolves, hated it! (sorry)

Keanu Reeves...poor guy! lol