Conference bookie::movies

    Pinocchio.
    

    Who played Pinocchio, or did he play himself?
    
    Lorna
    

  Since he was animated, I guess he was played by a blot of ink.

  George

    Re .0: Well, Costner was playing a rather wooden character in
    "Bodyguard," from all I read. His characters in "JFK" and "The
    Untouchables" were on the wooden side, too, but Jake in "Silverado" was
    very lively indeed, so I don't think Costner's acting is at fault.
    (Maybe he thought it was too much work being mercurial and goofy, and
    has been asking for unemotional characters ever since.)
    
    Re .2: Pinocchio played himself, although I hear he had a stunt double
    for the whale sequence. ;-)
    
    My vote for "wooden acting" would go to Joan Severance, not because
    she's the world's worst actress but because her lack-of-acting screwed
    up several episodes of my then-favorite TV series, and every time I
    hear that she's appearing in another movie I wonder just how she's
    getting the work. <Don't anybody bother to speculate, thanks.> Maybe
    "plastic" would be more appropriate than "wooden", but either way it
    ain't good.
    
    -b

    
    	RE: Beth
    
    	Speculate, nothing ... the reason she gets these parts is that
    	she's ******* gorgeous.
    
    							GTI
    

    What TV show was Joan Severance in? I don't recognize the name.
    
    Re. Kevin "Woody" Costner, maybe he gets roles that require wooden
    performances cuz he can't do any others.
    
    He's good looking, but that's where it ends, IMO.
    
    
    Marilyn 

    Re .6: "Wiseguy," first season, second story arc.
    
    -b

    
    al gore?
    

    I don't think Kevin Costner is a great actor, by any means, or even an
    extremely good one.  However, I do think that he tends to be quite
    likable on screen.  I enjoyed his performances in Dancing With Wolves,
    Field of Dreams, JFK, and Bull Durham.  Kevin Costner doesn't evoke any
    strong feelings in me.  I like him okay, but I don't love him.  I don't
    think he's a really good actor, but he seems competent enough.  He's
    pleasant enough to look at, but doesn't really turn me on.  Even
    though he's never been one of my favorites, I don't find anything
    objectionable about him.  So, I guess I don't really agree with .0's
    assessment.  I don't think Kevin Costner's *that* bad.
    
    On the other hand, I thought The Bodyguard, as a movie, was mindless
    and unrealistic, and dull.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .8, yes, that is the correct answer.  :-)
    

    Roger Moore.

     His eye brows done all his acting for him.
    
    
    SCott

    Victor Mature was also known for his great emotional range via his
    eyebrows. He could still act rings around Kostner tho.

    re .11, I *loved* Roger Moore.  He was handsome, classy, elegant,
    witty.  To me he will always be the *real* James Bond.  :-)  He may not
    have been a great actor, but I did think he had very good comic timing. 
    I can't help but think that it's really a tragedy when men who were as
    good looking as him when young have to grow old.  (And I don't think
    anybody on TV ever looked better than he did as The Saint.)
    
    Now, one actor that I would nominate for wooden is Sam Neill.  He never
    changes his expression no matter what he's doing - chasing dinasaurs or
    going at his wife with an axe!  I don't dislike him, but I find him
    quite boring on screen.  If I were a producer I would never cast him in
    any of my movies.
    
    Also, William Hurt.  Mr. Bland.  Why is he considered a great actor by
    some people?  Sure, occasionally he looks annoyed but that's about it.
    
    Lorna
    

My nomination for wooden film acting would be George Raft.


As far as Kevin Costner goes I'd agree that he's not that great an actor
but he is certainly competent. What he does seem to have though is presence,
a quality not to be underestimated in a film actor. He's made many highly
enjoyable films. As long as his part doesn't force him to stretch too much
and takes advantage of his personality he does enhance the film.



Randy

    Costner seems to have some kind of "All-American" quality, almost like
    Gary Cooper in the distant past.
    
    -Stephen

    My nomination would be Patrick Bergin.
    He always has the same staring eye and in none of the movies I've seen
    him he was believable, in my opinion.
    
    Re. Costner I agree with -1.
    
    
    Andrea

    re .16, I agree about Patrick Bergin.  I've noticed that staring eye,
    too, and don't like it one bit.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    Its a close run thing between Roger Moore and Charles Bronson.
    
    How about the infamous Sonny Lufts?

How about Charlie McCarthy? He just seemed to sit and stare in evry 
movie I saw him in.

- John

    
    Liam Neeson gets my vote for his complete lack of facial expression...
    
    
    
    
    Ian

    A recent George Burns quote I came across fits nicely into
    this topic:
    
    "George Raft and Gary Cooper were playing a scene together,
    standing next to  a cigar store wooden Indian..and the
    Indian was overacting." 
    
    ;-)
    
    I'll add William Hurt to this list of woodpecker fodder.
    
    Richard
    

    I'll continue the William Hurt bandwagon.
    
    But I must admit to being more of a Costner fan than many people
    in here.
    
    NAZZ

    Christoper Walken hands down winner.

    re .23, oh, I totally disagree with that!  I think Christopher Walken
    is very good actor, who also expresses emotion.
    
    Lorna
    

    Re: .22
    
    Nazz --
    
    It's nice to see we run in the same circles. I'll be happy to be on the
    Costner bandwagon. I LOVE his movies, and I agree with another noter;
    it's not his acting, it's his _presence_ on the screen. I've seen ALL
    of his and then some (like his 3-word scenes, no-word scenes, special
    unbilled appearance, etc.)
    
    Catherine
    

    Kevin Costner is the most over-rated piece of timber in Hollywood.
    
    re- a few...the real James Bond was,and always will be Sean Connery.
    
    
    
    
    
    					ian

        Re: .13, -1, etc...
    
        Roger Moore?   The *real* James Bond?   Blasphemy!!  You are hearby
        sentenced to watch "Moonraker" 1000 times! ;^)
    
    
        And another name from the Commercial-grade Plywood School of
    	Acting:
    
            Sam Elliot
    
    dk

    
      I'm a huge Costner fan, I love all of his movies.  The man is a
    legend in the making.  Bull Durham and Feild of dreams are two of the
    best baseball movies made(behind The Natural).  Though he didn't have
    much of an accent in Robin Hood(his presence was felt), it's the best
    "Robin Hood" movie I've seen.  He was excellent in Dances With Wolves,
    a role that I couldn't picture anybody else trying to tackle.  JFK,
    Oliver Stone directed it and wanted Costner-- enough said.  In The Body
    Guard, I enjoyed him in this otherwise dull movie.  The most exciting
    parts of the movie involved him(loved the kitchen scene!).  Kevin's a
    great actor that has tackled a variety of roles and I'd go and see any
    movie with him in it.

Re: .28


>    Though he didn't have much of an accent in Robin Hood...

he had loads of accent, and all of it american !!

:-)

	re .28:

	Sorry, I don't agree with you. Kevin Costner seems to fit in 
	every industrial-produced Hollywood movie in all aspects:
	Movies that *has* to include a certain amount of crying, vio-
	lent action, foreseeable tension climaxes, just to satisfy
	the average film watcher, the whole thing being focussed on
	*one thing*: $$$$$$.

	Not to say that other actors don't do this, but KC does it all_
	the_way_through. Remember the award festival in Bodyguard? E-
	veryone *knew* that the killer would make his attempt presice-
	ly at this moment, and of course he did. Everything what KC
	does seem so *planned* to me. I saw an awful film with him,
	where he was training for a racing cycle event with his bro-
	ther. This was typical Hollywood style: he had a deadly brain
	desease, but kept it as a secret and trained with his brother
	to help him in his depression, and on the racing day he col-
	lapsed (uhhh, tragedy) and of course the brother won the race.
	BWAHUHUHU.

	Dancing With Wolves was a good movie, but not because of KC.
	I would _love_ to have seen Jeff Bridges playing that part
	(or Jeremy Irons, or Daniel-Day Lewis, any of these would have
	done better).

	FWIW, I regard Tom Cruise being exactly on the same level as KC.

	Sorry, had to let some steam out...

	Poul

Perhaps those of you who feel that Kevin Costner's acting is a bit stiff 
would agree that he did a sensational job with his role in The Big Chill...


...as the guy who killed himself who you never saw except for his corpse in 
the beginning.  :)

Walker

    Re: a couple back...
    
        ditto! - Sam Elliot
    
    And I'm going to add a new one - Rachel Ward - though I do like some of 
    the movies she's been in...
    
    Karen.

    If Kevin Costner is such a *wooden actor* then why does he still get
    the big roles in big movies which leads to big bucks?  Some people just
    over-analyze movies and acting too much.  It's suppose to be
    entertainment, not your turn to try to be Siskel or Ebert!!  As matter
    of fact, every time Joyce Kulhawick on channel 4 gives a movie a bad
    review--I go and see it, because 9 out of 10 times it's an enjoyable
    movie!!!
    
    Ron

    I guess I just consider "wooden acting" as an acting style.
    My favorite actors could all be considered "wooden".  I've
    always liked James Stewart (probably the original wooden
    actor), Kevin Costner and TV/film attraction Pierce Brosnan.
    I'd even consider another one of my favorites, Sean Connery, 
    as wooden.  
    
    Jodi-
    
    

	re. 33:

    >If Kevin Costner is such a *wooden actor* then why does he still get
    >the big roles in big movies which leads to big bucks?  Some people just
    >over-analyze movies and acting too much.  It's suppose to be
    >entertainment, not your turn to try to be Siskel or Ebert!!  As matter
    >of fact, every time Joyce Kulhawick on channel 4 gives a movie a bad
    >review--I go and see it, because 9 out of 10 times it's an enjoyable
    >movie!!!
    
	Well, I happen to have the opinion that big roles in big movies
	which lead to big bucks is not necessarily the same as quality
	and talent...and just because 'some people' happen to have another
	opinion than the one of yours, it's not necessarily a matter of 
	over-analyzing..

	And what's entertainment? For me, it is to watch an inspired and
	honest film with talented character actors, and here I'm NOT tal-
	king about some serial-produced Holywood product (not to say that
	ALL Hollywood movies are bad).

	Poul

    re.34
    	I agree with Jodi.  I guess I just enjoy certain actors.  This note
    should be entitled *wooden roles* not *wooden actors*.  And my opinion
    has also differed after reading re.-1, thanx for enlightening me with
    your input.  I was just defending an actor I enjoy, regardless of his
    role.
    
    Regards,
    
    Ron
    

    
    yes, I to thinkt he titel should be changed to wooden roles!  If you
    think Kevin is a wooden actor then you didn't see him is Silvearo!
    Where he was a very funny/wirey/bendable/loveable/full spirted guy!

    re: .33
    
    It's funny, but I know a lot of people (including myself) who approach
    the arts the same way that you do.  If Joyce Kulhawik dislikes
    something, we are the first in line to see it.  I think that Joyce
    tries hard and is not a bad person, but as far as an Arts'
    reviewer goes, she is lost.  Whenever she dislikes something, I am in
    line immediately to see it.  Thank you Joyce.
    
    Keith
    
    And re: the subject matter of the note: Kevin Costner is not a "wooden
    actor" he is simply a personality.  And I think A PERFECT WORLD showed
    that he is a fine actor.  Just an opinion...

	re -1:

	Yeah, I agree he is not an actor, but quite a character. But if
	you look at him as an actor, and compare him to the likes of
	Robert de Niro, Michael Caine, Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, Robin
	Williams a.s.o., then he's _nothing_...

	Can't help it, I'm bashing a bit these days ;-)...

	Poul

I saw yesterday the 1958 Western The Bravados, starring Gregory Peck. If there ever
was a wooden actor ..... 

Donald.

    RE: Note 427.34 by 16564::NEWELL_JO
    > I've always liked James Stewart (probably the original wooden actor)
    
    Evidently you've never seen Stewart in "Vertigo". Or "Mr. Smith Goes to
    Washington".  Or any of his Westerns for director Anthony Mann.  Or... 
    come to think of it, what Stewart performances HAVE you seen that would
    lead you to classify his acting style as "wooden"?  
    
    Actually I agree with you that the quieter styles of acting can also
    be effective (after all, I'm a fan of Alan Ladd), but I'm amazed that
    no one else has taken exception to the use of Stewart's name in this
    context.  
    
    Ron D.

    >but I'm amazed that
    >no one else has taken exception to the use of Stewart's name in this
    >context.  
 
    I am too and I was the one who wrote the note. It's just my opinion.
    
    Although I have seen Stewart in many films the one that always
    comes to mind for me is "Rear Window".  
    
    I think of him as "wooded" basically because I don't feel he is
    terribly animated.  Animated being closer to performances from
    actors like Robin Williams, Billy Crystal, Jack Nickolson, Holly
    Hunter, Whoopie Goldberg.  
    
    Wooden actors seem to take alot to get a rise out of them. They
    appear cool, calm, collected most of the time.  At least this is
    how I would describe one.  
    
    Now I'll probably take a hit because I think Nickolson is animated.
    
    It's just my opinion.
    
    Jodi- 

    I think "because" he isn;t as animated as say Nicholson et al is what
    make him effective.  He has a 'gift/talent' for playing low key easy
    going types - like the ....oh darn whats the name of that guy...Autry
    the sharp shooter from WW1 who started as a conscience objector...
    anyway....I think low-key and wooden are getting mixed up - just my
    opinion of course.
    
    Jt

    I agree with the "wooden" label for Jimmy Stewart in his later films, 
    though some of the lack of animation in "Rear Window" may be due 
    to the wheelchair. ;-)
    
    He seemed to be much more of a "physical" actor in his earlier films,
    "The Philadelphia Story" and "It's a Wonderful Life" come to mind.
    
    

    "Wooden" should not be considered merely the opposite of "animated".
    Anthony Hopkins has had some very un-animated roles, but he
    consistently
    displays a great intensity nonetheless. A good example is Silence of
    the Lambs, where his character is very quiet (except for a few times
    when he's eating people), but very menacing.
    
    For lesser quality actors, "wooden" isn't as bad as its unenviable
    counterpart -- overacting!
    			Jim

   > "Wooden" should not be considered merely the opposite of "animated".
   > Anthony Hopkins has had some very un-animated roles, but he
   > consistently displays a great intensity nonetheless. 
    
    I agree, even though I was the one making th comparison.
    
    I think we get characters and the character of the actor,
    confused.  I'm not sure Costner could ever do a mania scene
    like Robin Williams, so I'd say Costner's character or acting
    style is generally stiff or "wooden".
    
    Hopkins can and often does play a stuffy or stiff (wooden)
    character but his acting style is more broad and he could
    play the maniac, given the right role.
    
    When I say "wooden" I look at what the actor seems most 
    comfortable with and uses the most. Costner falls in this
    category. So does Stewart, at least in the roles I've seen.
    
    Since I prefer stuffy, aristocratic, noble, wooden men. I
    enjoy an actor with those acting qualities, as long as the
    surface can be cracked at some point and *some* emotions
    show through.
    
    Jodi-
     
     
    A good example is Silence of
    the Lambs, where his character is very quiet (except for a few times
    when he's eating people), but very menacing.
    
    For lesser quality actors, "wooden" isn't as bad as its unenviable
    counterpart -- overacting!
    			Jim

    

    I'm getting confused here. I always thought 'wooden' acting meant
    bad acting: acting by people who can't express any emotion whatsoever.
    Such actors don't usually go for the dynamic, emotion-packed scenes
    but, if they do, they look even more unconvincing (e.g. Ronald Regan in
    'Kings Row', Michael Caine in films like 'The Swarm' or 'Beyond The
    Poseidon Adventure' or Kevin Costner in 'Robin Hood'.) 
    
    Actors like William Hurt or James Stewart or Jeff Bridges don't do a lot, 
    but you *always* know what their characters are thinking and that, as 
    far as I'm concerned, is what good acting is all about. Jack Nicholson 
    used to be good at it, too, before 'Batman' came along and showed him that 
    shamelessly hamming it up would make him even more money.
    
    Nick
    

	re .48:

	You call Michael Caine _unconvincing_???? I really don't under-
	stand this, IMO he's one of the most talented actors nowadays
	and has proved this in many, many films - and he surely can
	play everything from Shakespeare to every sort of modern film
	roles - I don't believe it, mentioning him on the same line as
	Ronald Reagan...and Jeff Bridges surely has played roles where
	he expressed a lot - 'Hollywood Cowboy' (_excellent_), 'Against
	All Odds', 'Thunderbolt' (I'm not sure of the title here, but
	it was the one with Clint Eastwood) - he has always played his
	parts with his heart and great energy.

	And James Stewart - he has always had an amazing talent to iden-
	tify himself with his roles - a true character actor...

	Poul

    RE: .49  by 51847::SANDGREN 
    
	>re .48:

	>You call Michael Caine _unconvincing_???? I really don't under-
	>stand this, IMO he's one of the most talented actors nowadays
	>and has proved this in many, many films - and he surely can
	>play everything from Shakespeare to every sort of modern film
	>roles - I don't believe it, mentioning him on the same line as
	>Ronald Reagan...
    
    Ronald Reagan's in a class by himself.  Look at the role he slept
    through for eight years in Washington.  But you must admit Michael
    Caine has had an admittedly mixed career.  He is capable of very good
    work as he showed from the start in "Zulu", but has frequently taken
    jobs that required little effort just to keep the money rolling in.  
    
    I don't fault him for this at all, mind you.
    

    I think Michael Caine is a great actor. I also think he can be as
    wooden as a fence when he's just standing in front of the camera and
    saying his lines for the money (e.g. the films I mentioned.)
    
    The point I was trying to make is that 'quiet' actors, ones who don't
    'do' a lot (who don't let you *know* that they're acting) but who seem
    somehow to be real people caught in front of a camera are, in fact, the
    best actors. For someone to stand before the camera and, without saying
    a word, let you know exactly what's going on in their minds - *that* is
    great acting. (Great movie acting at least; I don't think it's quite
    the same as stage acting, but that's another conference entirely.)
    
    A few examples:
    
    Jeff Bridges:    The Fisher King and The Fabulous Baker Boys
    Robin Williams:  Awakenings
    Clint Eastwood:  Unforgiven
    Gene Hackman:    Unforgiven
    Michael Caine:   The Honorary Consul and Mona Lisa
    Anthony Hopkins: A Bridge Too Far, Howards End, The Remains Of The Day
    
    
    Nick

    There is a difference between wooden and subdued.  Wooden brings to
    mind (alas) the oft-mentioned Kevin Costner and the word monotonous as
    well as the word, flat.  His performance in Dances with Wolves was
    fairly wooden.  His flat voiceover in the movie was passable because
    he was supposed to be recording his thoughts in a diary. 
    Unfortunately, his dialog in the entire movie of Robin Hood: Prince o'
    Thieves sounded just like that voiceover in Dances with Wolves.  Flat,
    no emotion.   I saw the Bodyguard the other day on cable.  Ouch.  No
    only a wooden performance, but a poor role at that.
    
    Subdued (the "cool customer") can be done without being wooden. Clint
    Eastwood did subdued in Line of Fire and did it well.  Brian Dennehey
    (sp) has done sudued without being wooden (his sherrif in Silverado
    comes to mind).  And others.
    
    
    kim   

FWIW, there was a story that Jeremy Irons was nominated for Best Non-acting
Performance (in the BAFTAs I suppose) for his appearance as Charles in
Brideshead.

Helen

    
    
       All time greatest wooden actors.....
    
          Steven Seagal....another bad actor who thinks he can direct
                           this man could not direct traffic.
    
          Woody Allen...his name says it all.
    
          David Hassellhoff...& the whole cast of Baywatch
    
          River Phoenix...a wooden actor now in a wooden box
    
          Macually Culkin...a annoying rich little ****
    
                         the list is endless
                         but i've not got the time.  
        
        

    
    	Don't you ever say anything positive about anything?
    
    
    							GTI
    

    
    
      re.55
    
           yes, i'm positive River Phoenix is dead.
    
    
                                     

    
    	Ahah ... progress.
    
    							GTI

    Enjoyed Bull Durham and Dances with Wolves and think he did a decent
    job in both. On the other hand, I thought Field of Dreams was totally
    stupid and one of the sorriest excuses I have seen for a baseball
    movie. Doesn't hold a candle to Bang the Drum Slowly. Then again, Bang
    the Drum Slowly has DeNiro, one of the alltime best actors I have seen.
    Try to picture Costner doing Raging Bull or saying "You talking to
    ME?!!" and having the impact DeNiro had in Taxi Driver. IMHO I can't
    imagine Costner making a good pimple on DeNIro's butt when it comes to 
    abilities. 

    re: On the other hand, I thought Field of Dreams was totally
        stupid and one of the sorriest excuses I have seen for a baseball
        movie. 
    
    As Field of Dreams is one of my all time favorites I have to comment:
    
    IMHO -  Field of Dreams is not a baseball movie... it is no more a
    baseball movie than Cinderella is a dance movie. Baseball is  the
    background vehicle for the growth of Ray (main character played by
    Costner)  and for the healing of old feelings. It's a movie about a son
    and his relationship with his father and that same man and his current
    relationship with his family.
     
    my 2 cents
    
    janetb.

    See note 288 for a discussion of "Field of Dreams".
    
    -b-the-moderator

	Theresa Russell gets a vote from me. I have been in doubt about
	her abilities, but last night I watched the first part of a soap
	opera in three parts - and it was painful to watch her try to
	act. It looks like she even can't convince herself in what she's
	doing...

	Poul