Typhoon20, on Sep 10 2007, 06:15 AM, said:
When I said ''Will's doing THIS more for the oscar'' I was referring to SP, not IAL or JH. You know, as much as I do, that Hancock and IAL are not oscar material, those type of sci-fi movies almost never make it to the oscars, so it's pointless to relate to this.
Seven Pounds is the last movie I'd think you would be referring to. We hardly know what it's about. You said:
"I'm pretty sure Will is doing this more for the oscars than he is doing it to become a better all around actor."
How do you know that? Look at the last few movies he's done and will be doing: Pursuit of Happyness, I Am Legend, Hancock and Seven Pounds. All are serious roles, but we know that I Am Legend and Hancock aren't going to get him nominated for Oscars. So what are we saying? For those two movies, he's interested in diversifying his roles, but for POH and Seven Pounds (which we don't know much about), he's doing it more for Oscars? How do we differentiate between the two. The more sensible thing to speculate is that he is simply divesifying his roles, and if Oscar level material arises (which are usually more serious roles), he will take it. But it's obvious that he's not simply picking serious roles if his focus was on Oscar or he wouldn't be doing I Am Legend and Hancock.
Quote
Apples and Oranges. The general public, the people who go see Will's movies don't view any of Will's movies as flops. Critics however would disagree with you. You seem to view this situation from one side of the story, the general publics' side. With movies there are 2 sides to please, the general public and the critics. One brings you money, the other respect. We always blame the critics for being cynical (beeep) but they aren't completely wrong you know.
Again, Will hasn't generally done the types of movies that critics will rate highly to any great extent, and admittedly, he doesn't make movies for the critics... he makes them for the fans and the viewers. Moreover, the critics started off as biased since Will doesn't come from an acting background; he comes from hip hop. Early in his career, even with movies like Six Degrees and Bad Boys, he was viewed as a rapper who was trying to act. The label was still there for Independence Day and MIB... It wasn't really until Enemy of the State (a serious role) that he really shed that label. Even to this present day, I've read reviews that have mentioned that Will should stick to acting. There is an inherent bias there, and it hasn't been helped by the fact that the majority of his roles have been action, sci-fi...
The critics have thier place... in this particular discussion, their place and their opinions aren't all that prominent...
Quote
I wouldn't compare Denzel to Will but if you must insist, box-office wise Will's the king, but almost all of Denzel's movies have high ratings from critics, something Will almost never has, except for MIB and Enemy of the state. You know with who he worked on Enemy of the state right ? That movie which Tony Scott directed was gold, pure brilliance. Yes I agree with you that working with A-list directors doesn't guarantee success, I don't think I ever stated anything where I said it would, but anyway working with A-list directors can only be a good thing. When you compare Will's B-list directors so to say, to his A-list directors, you'll see the gap I'm trying to refer to. Box-office wise it's not so different, but again Will's charm brings in money regardless how the movie sucks, and WWW is a good example of that.Plus working with A-list directors can also help Will's acting become even THAT MUCH better. There are so many things that A-list directors can bring to a movie compared to B-list directors. There's a reason why the one's called A-list and the other B-list.
Again, it's the types of movies Will has done... fun loving, action adventure, sci-fi roles... not serious roles... The vast majority of Denzel's movies have depicted him in serious roles, but the few that didn't also happened not to do all that well in the box office as well as critically. It's not Will, it's not the directors... it's generally the types of movies. You can get the most critically acclaimed director, but if he's directing Bad Boys 3, know that the movie isn't going to get the best reviews by critics who generally don't view those types of movies positively, regardless of the director attached.
Quote
Do you think only serious movies (oscar stuff) can make it in the top 200 (or 500, whatever) best movies ever ? That's not really a great way to look at it. Raiders of the lost ark, Star wars, LOTR, Indiana Jones series, Dr. Strangelove, Fight Club, Matrix, Alien, Forrest Gump, Bourne Ultimatum, Terminator....great examples that all genres can make it in the TOP 200. Since Will made movies in almost all genres, it makes you wonder.
Some of those are classics, but I guarantee you that if you looked up the Sci-fi genre, MIB and Independence Day are in the mix... Cop movies, action/adventure... Bad Boys 1 is somewhere in there... I bet for thrillers, Enemy of the State isn't all that high, but it was an awesome movie, wasn't it? When people talk about how good an actor Will is, I hardly ever hear anyone outside of serious fans mention how good a job he did on Enemy of the State or how good a movie it was. I know people who have never heard of Enemy of the State. Take into account the fact that Will has done a lot of light roles and it's easy to see why he doesn't have a lot of movies in the top 200 or 500. Again, it's the sorts of movies he's done, not the directors he's worked with...
Quote
Those movies have been mediocre. You consider them good, I consider them great, but the critics would disagree. Ali failed, box-office was horrible. BB2 got ripped by critics, I robot, Shark Tale, Hitch and even POH were all considered 60% movies, ratings were mediocre, not so bad, but not so good either.
Yeah, I talked about the critics earlier. One thing I must mention is POH.... Universally agreed upon was how great of a job Will and Jaden did and how palpable the bond was... natural... Yet, most of the critics who didn't like the movie took issue with that very thing... How many times did we read about the relationship being too sappy, or being forced... too idealistic... There were critics who complained that the movie placed too much of an emphasis on money and that the movie should have been called "The Pursuit of Richyness," completely missing the message behind the story. Are these the critics that we're extolling so highly? Thank God Will doesn't pick his movies based on how critics would respond.
Quote
The thing I very much agree with you is that A-list directors doesn't necessarily make them the best for a given project, I can only say amen to that. That's the truth. But, regardless, A-list directors have a bigger, much bigger chance to make any given project so much better. Hitch was great, and many loved it due to Wills' and Kevin James' chemistry. Directing was seriously mediocre, Imagine Judd Apatow directing it. That movie could have went down as one of the greatest romantic comedies ever with that extra touch.
I think you're overrating what big name directors can do, Ty. What would Judd Apatow have done to make Hitch as great as you imagine he could make it? What would Spielberg have done to make Bad Boys 2 a top 200 movie?
Quote
That's the problem with Will's latest set of movies, you feel like there's so much more room for development. And that's not Will's fault per se, but the team behind the movie.Muccini, did the best he could given his talent and experience. Nobody discredits him, especially not me.
I simply don't believe that Will should be chasing after A list directors to do his movies like some desparate sycophant. He should be focused on the movies themselves, not the directors. Yes, it would be nice for him to work with great directors, but I do not believe that this is what will decide his destiny as an actor.
Quote
Will's at least 15 years younger than Denzel, Denzel made approximately 45 movies.
Will already has 26 movies on his name. So I wouldn't quite say the gap is that big between them.
26? Really? I don't think it's 26.
Quote
The difference is just in their act of interest. One does mostly sci-fi actions the other likes to do drama/thrillers more than anything.I don't know why the discussion suddenly went into ''Will will be there in time when he takes on more serious roles''....If I'm not mistaken the discussion about SP wasn't about Will's acting.He's a fine actor, I regard him as one of the best. Nobody can take on so many diverse roles and succeed in every one of them.
I took the discussion to the ''Will will be there in time when he takes on more serious roles'' because that's exactly what will happen. It will take Will a few serious movies before he can properly find his niche... movies that fit him best and directors that fit him best. Again, remember that though will has been acting for some time, the drama genre is still somewhat new. As he matures in the genre, I expect him to become better at picking movies that fit him and directors that are best for the movie, whether known or unknown... and oftentimes, if not most of the time, the unknown director is best for a movie.
Quote
It's just a wish from me, as a fan, to see Will work with the likes of Judd Apatow, Tony Scott, Paul Greengrass, Christoper Nolan.It's like letting Jordan or Kobe play under doug collins or Del Harris. You wonder how it would have been if they played under...let's say Phil Jackson.
I'm glad you mentioned basketball... I think I can rest my case here as well. Not all basketball coaches are the best fit for a given team. Take the Team USA that Larry Brown coached a few years back... they lost three games in the 2004 Olympics. As great a coach as Larry Brown is, and as much talent as he had on that team, that shouldn't have happened, but it did, because he wasn't the best fit for the team. He is a defensive minded coach and likes to slow the game down, taking away a natural advantage that Team USA has over all international competition... speed. He stubbornly sat Carmelo Anthony and Lebron James for long stretches simply because he doesn't like to play young players. Look what he did to Darko in Detroit.
We can't say that Larry Brown would help any given NBA basketball team, inspite of how good of a coach he is. Same thing with a director. He may be a great director, but a lesser known director may be able to do a better job than him.
0
