Quote:
Originally posted by MrPeanut
The movie was adapted by the book's author (which can still make for a bad adaptation, I can grant you that much), but yeah no I've found the exact opposite to be true, and I feel like most film critics/theorists would agree.
Good performances are an important component of the end product (although I would argue far from the most important even still), but actors are often only as good as the directors know how to handle/direct them toward the performance they want.
|
Nah, that's inaccurate, Peanut.
Bad actors = bad films. It's common sense and critics agree. Bad actors will drag the greatest of films down. There's no way around it. You can be recognised or even win an Academy Award for Best Actor/Actress in a bad film. For instance, Meryl Streep won an Oscar for "The Iron Lady," despite its less-than-stellar reviews and Marion Cotillard and Penélope Cruz were praised for their work in "Nine," even though the film was completely trashed by both critics and fans. Penélope Cruz was even nominated for an Academy Award for "Nine!" But there's a slim to none chance that a great film can shine
THROUGH a cast of awful actors. It's nearly impossible and I can't think of any examples of a film be praised or awarded despite its bad actors. "Gone Girl" gets praise now, because studios can pay for good reviews and skew public opinion with ease today.
...Vin
