Yes Man
- Thread starter Barca
- Start date
I think he is a very talented actor. He needs to fire his agent and look for work outside of the same old stuff that he has done over and over. Look at what he did with The Truman Show. He needs to get out of the old Jerry Lewis shtick that he usually does, and find himself some challenging roles. If he holds out for those, I think he will get them. Even if he takes a smaller role in a film for less money, it will be worth it. Unless he's just taking the biggest parts for the most money. In which case, its disappointing and he only has himself to blame.The Bandit said:Same thing over and over in every movie....it gets tiring.
I'm not a fan at all, but Brad Pitt has done some decent stuff. The Coen brothers movie he was in earlier this year was good and I'm interested in seeing his new one next week where he's born as an old man and gets younger as he ages. The pre-release buzz has been very good.TheShadow said:
There's a lot more to it than just picking and choosing roles. The behind-the-scenes business in the movie industry is insanely complicated - egos, cliques, the media, mafia-like dealings, agents, managers, studios, producers, directors, financial considerations on many levels, international and video markets to take into account - the list goes on and on.Questor said:
Perception is over 90% of reality. If you're not "hot", then you're nothing and you have to wait and hope. If you take a TV role, you may lock yourself out of future movie roles. If you accept a lesser role, you become a bit-part actor. Being overexposed can be good, but it is normally bad. Et cetera, etc.
There are very few cases of "Tarantino gives Travolta ensemble movie role and resurrects his career."
Yes, Jim Carrey needs to be smart, but ultimately, he needs to make money (for the studio and producers) and pay his own bills.
Why do we go to Restaurants?
He didn't do anything with "The Truman Show". The great director, Peter Weir, did "The Truman Show". Jim Carrey was just lucky to be in it and decided, for that film, to take direction well. Same thing with "Eternal Sunshine". It's all about Michel Gondry and what a good script with good direction can achieve.
In both films, everyone around him got Oscar nominations except him. It's a direct slap in the face since everyone in the industry knows what a prick he is. So he tried a couple of other styles ("23" for example) but since they were flops, he's now going back to his tired and true (yes, tired) class clown formula.
Remember, we go to a restaurant because of the Chef, not the waiter. It's the food/substance that counts. Actors are only bringing to you what someone else has already prepared
Questor said:
He didn't do anything with "The Truman Show". The great director, Peter Weir, did "The Truman Show". Jim Carrey was just lucky to be in it and decided, for that film, to take direction well. Same thing with "Eternal Sunshine". It's all about Michel Gondry and what a good script with good direction can achieve.
In both films, everyone around him got Oscar nominations except him. It's a direct slap in the face since everyone in the industry knows what a prick he is. So he tried a couple of other styles ("23" for example) but since they were flops, he's now going back to his tired and true (yes, tired) class clown formula.
Remember, we go to a restaurant because of the Chef, not the waiter. It's the food/substance that counts. Actors are only bringing to you what someone else has already prepared
Brad Pitt has been in some very good flics. Se7en, 7 Years in Tibet, Fight Club, Meet Joe Black, Ocean's Eleven/Twelve, to name a few. I'm not familiar with all of his films, so I can't comment on them. Sure, maybe he falls short if you compare him to Eastwood or Nicholson or Beatty. But in my opinion, Pitt has done enough good movies that he deserves some respect, even if not everything is of a high standard. Cruise and Smith are both dorks. Very well paid dorks, I might add.TheShadow said:
I hate to say it, but the only decent movie that Jim Carrey has been in where he's also done a good job is "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind."
I personally disliked "The Truman Show" (thought it was overhyped while being quite average + too Hollywood-ish) and thought Carrey was terrible in it - caught between his slapstick schtick and trying to really act. It looked to me like he was an actor trying emulate what a real actor does - and it was painful to watch him flounder and fuck up what should have been his signature, coming-out-as-a-serious-actor role.
The other schlock? Mindless comedies. Fun fluff, but nothing that I'll seriously watch years from now or have stored in my mind forever as a great movie.
I personally disliked "The Truman Show" (thought it was overhyped while being quite average + too Hollywood-ish) and thought Carrey was terrible in it - caught between his slapstick schtick and trying to really act. It looked to me like he was an actor trying emulate what a real actor does - and it was painful to watch him flounder and fuck up what should have been his signature, coming-out-as-a-serious-actor role.
The other schlock? Mindless comedies. Fun fluff, but nothing that I'll seriously watch years from now or have stored in my mind forever as a great movie.
I haven't seen him in Eternal Sunshine. I liked the Truman Show, but saw it a few years ago, and I can't say I watched it and Jim Carey's role in it very critically. If I were to watch it again, I may very well agree with you about Carey. For sure most of his stuff is fluff and mindless. I think it is marketed to the 12-18 year old demographic. They aren't known for their appreciation of deep, sophisticated, high quality cinema. But I did like him in the Mask.Captain Fantastic said:
Bridgeman said:
Exactly.
I liken Carry to Robin Williams.
Williams started out as a comedian, stuck to what worked, but at some point broke out and did a lot of great acting - The Fisher King, Goodwill Hunting, Dead Poets, but he still goes back to Schlock even to this day.
And that's the key. You can't do a whole bunch of silly, mindless movies targetting teens and 20-something males and be expected to be taken seriously. He became typecast.Questor said:
Jim Carrey painted himself in a corner - through his choice of roles (for money, so at least he's been paid) AND his apparently bad/difficult attitude behind-the-scenes. And he didn't knock his big chance (Truman Show) out of the park when he had the opportunity to break through as a more mainstream, respected actor (as opposed to a niche slapstick-y comedien doing hokey adolescent movies.) Plus, having watched his so-called "serious" films, I don't think he's done a good enough job growing as an actor - I constantly find myself asking if he ever took any acting lessons?
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Burn After Reading. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.TheShadow said:
No.Surfbum84 said:
You should see a doctor about your stomach.Surfbum84 said:
Conan is doing a specific role - T.V. talk show host. He has to play the straight man and also has to entertain (being generous) as a stand-up and through skits. He's also a very good comedy writer. But his main job is to interview celebrity guests - a tough job if you have any idea on the nonsense that entails. Telented guy who has decided to settle into a comfortable job and he'll probably* be rewarded with the Tonight Show after Jay Leno (a terrible host, IMO who was once a good comedien) retires or is pushed out the door.
At this point, Jim Carrey is just a comedic actor. He hasn't done stand-up in YEARS. He doesn't write his own material. And he hasn't grown as an actor.
*I say probably because after the Letterman or Leno replacing Carson train wreck, you can never say for sure.
