A Note from Starfire: I am not listing everything in this article or each of the reviews of his greatest actors list. The link is below if you want the full article.
September 23, 2009 Branwyn Lancourt
To recap, in my recent article on Robert Pattinson and the "enduring appeal of pale, white dudes," a gaggle of fans of the movie "Twilight" took umbrage to some things I said about their beloved idol.
Most of the reactions was pretty inane, along the lines of:
"Hey you ugly, loser, geek, doodyheaded, nincompoop - you WISH you were as HOT as our boy Pattinson, you're just a jealous smelly mongrel...DIE DIE DIEl!!!"
These remarks I merely brushed off as so much hot, fetid air expelled from a bunch of sub-mental moronic twits. There was one comment, however, that sparked my interest: an avid fan asked what MY idea of a great actor was. I thought it was a fair question, and deserved a well thought out response. Moreover, I felt it was a good opportunity to add weight to my opinions on Pattinson's meager abilities as a thespian and perhaps give a little history lesson to the uneducated reader who might not be familiar with the TRUE giants of the industry.
So, as a follow up to my first post on the Greats, from 10-6, here are my Top Five Greatest Actors of All Time:
5) Jack Lemmon AND Warren Oates (a TIE)
Both of these actors absolutely needed to be included on this list and as there are only ten slots, I had to call a tie for fifth place.
4) Marlon Brando
3) Humphrey Bogart
2) Jack Nicholson
1) James Stewart
So there you have it, the top ten greatest actors of all time!
Now some of you may argue that Robert Pattinson is still young, and that it's unfair to compare his work with these legends. I however disagree. I was asked my opinion as to what I considered to be great acting and these actors are it. Moreover, hearing so many of you go on about Pattinson's "brilliance," literally began to turn my stomach. It wasn't so much that I hate Pattinson, I just hate what we've become as a society when it comes to our art and culture. We are worshipping at the altar of mediocrity!
For those that say Pattinson "could yet still develop," I say "no." You see, even at the start of their careers all of the actors I've mentioned in my articles shared that undeniable something which I refer to as "the goods." Pattinson just doesn't have it. He's merely a colorless hack with a slight physical appeal. I don't say this to be cruel, it's just the truth. I guess in writing these articles I'm attempting to shine a spotlight on what we value nowadays as a society. Has respect for actual talent gone completely out the window? Will we keep culturally devolving until someday, someone taking a dump on national TV for an hour will pass as an evening's worth of entertainment? I surely hope not...I surely hope not.
Source
2 comments:
Some of My Comments at this dude's site:
Starfire:
Well I don't know about whomever it is you are referring to as being 12 or 15 but I am definitely far beyond that age.
Rob doesn't deserve the type of criticism you are giving him. Take all the actors you listed which are great, I admit, but perhaps you should have had a study of each of them at age 23, Rob's age. He's barely begun for Pete's sake.
Rob has charisma and sex appeal as well as a great deal of promise as an actor. He played Edward Cullen perfectly IMO and brought to life Edward from the book in my mind.
As to how he looks, that's just plain ridiculous to slag him for that. After all beauty is in the eye of the beholder. His looks are his own but the important thing is, if you really got to know him, you'd find that he is quite shy, unassuming, very grounded, intelligent as well as having a great sense of humor. Moreover he's a really nice guy as well, everyone who meets him, works with him etc. knows this.
Branwyn Lancourt says:
Was referring to 'callmestacy'.
I hear the 'he's only starting out' argument a lot. That's fine. I was asked what I thought were 'great' actors, and I gave my list. To give a bit more back information...
Jack Lemmon won an oscar for his first major role Dustin Hoffman was nominated for an oscar for his first major role, and then again 2 years later Nicholson was nominated for an oscar for his first major role Brando was nominated for an oscar for his first major role...
They all weren't much older than Pattinson.
It's one thing if you think the guy's got 'sex appeal and charisma'.. but it just backs up my INITIAL argument...and I will quote...
"As far as his acting skills are concerned, from what I've seen he's kinda like the bassist in Spinal Tap - luke warm water. Neither here nor there, just egg shell white, wall paper mundane-ity. Still, this kid is the hottest tween sensation since Kirk Cameron and that's fine by me. Hell I'm no party pooper, let the little chicklets enjoy their new found messiah to their hearts content. However, it does give me pause. If our heroes are a direct reflection on ourselves as a society, then what does it mean when they're all surface and no substance? Robert Smith set a legion of disaffected young ladies hearts a twitter with his rats nest hair and smeared lipstick, but underneath the cultivated facade was a genuine artist. Robert Pattinson is just another pretty face, which I fear is all anyone wants to aspire to be anymore."
(read on)
Starfire says:
You're wrong with the four actors you named as being near or around Rob's age when they won oscars. None of them were. Let me see here:
Jack Lemmon's first Oscar win for Best Actor in a Leading Role was in 1954 for "Paper Tiger." He was 48 years old.
Dustin Hoffman's first Oscar win for Best Actor in a Leading Role was in 1979 for "Kramer vs. Kramer." He was 43 years old.
Jack Nicholson's first Oscar win for Best Actor in a Leading Role was in 1975 for "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." He was 38 years old.
The only one who was closest to Robert's age was Marlon Brando. He got his first Oscar win for B.A. in 1954 with "On the Waterfront." He was 30 years old. And I have to say at that time for many, Brando's appeal was based mostly on his looks and charisma. His acting got better though as he got older.
I feel this will be the same for Robert. He's not going away sir, anytime soon, mark my words. My own opinion and I am sorry you think differently, but hey that's America, is that Rob has a lot of untapped potential. I just wonder though did you read Twilight? Or at least see his performance in the movie? Just curious.
Branwyn Lancourt says:
Are you really that obtuse, or are you just being difficult?
I said Hoffman was NOMINATED for an oscar for his first role - he was 30. Nicholson was NOMINATED for his first major role - he was 32 Brando was NOMINATED for his first major role - he was 28 and Lemmon did indeed WIN his first oscar not at 48, but at 30 for Mr. Roberts as best supporting actor.
besides which... jesus, Pattinson will NEVER be a great actor, sorry.
Starfire says:
I didn't feel I was being obtuse. I didn't insult you one bit why do you feel you need to do that to me? My oversight about the three who were nominated as you said was a mistake. I apologize.
As for your last comment. That's your opinion, but the majority of his fans, and he has fans of all ages and backgrounds including celebs, IMO would probably disagree.
Starfire says:
P.S. You never answered my questions.
______________
Anyway the end of this story is we commented back and forth a few times and by the end I showed him respect and vice versa.
Post a Comment