World's Best Actor

Because, IMHO, the whole plot and frame of the Harry Potter books and films is stupid. It is a sign more of a lack than an abundance of imagination on the part of J.K. Rowling, and she should never have been able to become the richest lady in Britain because of such empty, meaningless, escapist trash. I'll have no part of that, whatever it's considered.

I was very sorry to hear that great actors such as Alan Rickman and Gary Oldman had put their reputations at stake by starring in these movies.

 

But apart from that ......... was it good.

 

Nothing wrong with a bit of escapism, Harry Potter is just good, harmless, unpretentious childrens fantasy.

 

Maybe not, but the Potter books just aren't all that good.
In my opinion, obviously.

 

Steven Seagal (Seagull )
Why? You need to be a really good actor to keep that same facial expression when 50 angry thugs are coming at you waving their knives. :lol:

 

Especially when you know you are going to "whip their Commy asses!!"

 

Actually, I don't believe that Mr. Seagal has ever faced Communists in any of his movies. 8)

 

I stand corrected

But you get my drift?

 

No but he has (i believe) faced German terrorists). :lol:

 

G.P

Was that "German terrorists"? or "German tourists!" :lol:

 

They were Americans faking German accents to sound tougher! :lol:

 

Really I thought they were natural Germans,

A bit like dick van dyke.

Cor blimey Mary Poppins.

 

The latter; you know how nasty they can get when they can't get that photo of Mickey Mouse they wanted so bad for their kin back home!

 

Some actors are quite good at doing, what are for them, foreign accents. British actor Bob Hoskins comes to mind for me. He can do a perfect American accent, yet his normal accent is decidedly Cockney. And Mel Gibson, who has an Australian accent when he's not acting in a movie.

 

I thought Mel Gibson's Scots accent in Braveheart was pretty poor actually, his American accent is pretty good though, but then he does live there!

 

Everything about Braveheart was pretty poor.

Watch Rob Roy instead. Better casting, directing, acting, script & historical accuracy.

 

Please tell me you did not say that... :roll:
Rob Roy was a cattle thief who switched sides between England & Scotland depending on who gave the greater advantage.

Mind you, aside from the plot line, it is more historically accurate than Braveheart, I agree. But then, most things are!

 

Maybe, but at least Braveheart was fun to watch with all the inaccurate battles and empty heroism. Rob Roy was mostly either disgusting or boring.

 

Ricky, I chose my words carefully. I avoided calling Rob Roy historically accurate, because I know it wasn't. I merely wanted to point out that it was more historically accurate than Braveheart. (But that's not difficult!!)

Roel, I can't believe that you found Braveheart more entertaining than Rob Roy. You do suprise me.

 

david, in that case, I forgive you. 8)
And retract my statement above.

If you do not mind disconnecting your brain, Braveheart is a 'fairly' enjoyable film. We were actually shown clips of the battle scenes in a seminar at Uni to demonstrate that Medieval battles were not nice. Obviously We were warned about the fact that the actual equipment, methods etc were total rubbish historically, but the feel of it (pain, blood, etc) was about right.