Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Criteria

Cross reference each actor with a list of the Top 100 films (your list, The National Film Critics list, AFI, just something); how many Top 100 films is each actor in?

Evaluate range; is DeNiro the same character in each of his top movies? No. Does he have good performances across a range of genres? I would say yes.

Subtract points NOT for bad films but BAD performances in BAD films; thus Oldman can't be blamed if JFK gets crushed under the weight of Kevin Costner. His performance as Oswald is terrific.

Tiebreaker? Boxoffice. Possibly Oscars.

Holla back.

1 comment:

T. Azimuth Schwitters said...

I agree about the importance of:

Dramatic/Comedic Range
Number of Good Performances
Importance of Being in Good/Great Movies

I also think I would put more importance on nominations for major awards; although awards don't tell the whole story, they still reflect the opinions of a pretty knowledgeable bunch of insiders--who better to lift up actors than other actors?

I'm (as usual) in disagreement with you over box office--I don't think it matters two cents if an actor is profitable, especially given the different financial expectations of films in different genres (i.e.-independent films and dramas don't make much bank; action movies and comedies do, etc.).

My criteria:

1. Quality of specific performances
2. Number of exceptional performances
3. Range/Willingness to take risks
4. Influence on other actors, both of his/her time and later
5. Ability to AVOID specifically BAD performances (that's you, Michael Caine) and, to some extent, BAD movies (I'm looking at you, Diane Keaton)

Tiebreakers:
1. Awards received.

What say you, sir?