I think Denzel Washington has shown an incredible amount of range in his roles. From Malcolm X and Steven Biko (Cry Freedom), to Ruben "Hurricane"Carter and a man paralyzed from the neck down (Bone Collector). I think all the characters had very different styles and personalities and he played them all to a tee. That's why he got my vote. I wish he had the same opportunities for roles as some of the other guys on your list. (A lot of their characters had to be white to maintain historical accuracy, realism, etc....usually ) Also, where the hell is Kevin Spacey?!
Kevin Spacey. And to me, it isn't even close. I'd list Ed Norton near the top of my list, if only for his recent work (I haven't seen all his movies yet). And just cause I haven't seen him listed yet, I have to mention Bruce Willis. He has really moved from his early action hero days to play characters with more depth, like in Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Twelve Monkeys.
Pacino is the man. But, Any Given Sunday and The Devil's Advocate were horrible movies. Pacino was great in Heat with Deniro.
I was trying to forget Hudson Hawk. I think actors should be given a free pass on one bad movie. I like Orson Wells, but I didn't think Transformers: The Movie was his best work.
Hudson Hawk,LMAO!!! Dont forget Disneys The Kid! Willis does a lot of movies that Im interested in and is a really good actor in my opinion.
Edward Norton is great, and very underrated. I've seen many of his movies, but just recently I saw "American History X'. It was one of the best movies I have ever seen. I agree with those who say Kevin Spacey should be on the list too. He was brillant in "American Beauty" , along with his other movies.Johnny Depp should also be on the list, despite his drug abuse problems. Cod
Eastwood is actually a very underrated actor mainly because he is viewed as one-dimentional with his Dirty Harry and cowboy roles. Personally, I think he may be more skilled as a director and/or producer but his acting is underrated. I like Norton a lot. I do think he has the potential to reach the ranks of the greats if he can keep it together. Robert Downey Jr. was on his way to a career as a VERY respected actor and we all know that story.
Gary Oldman, anyone? Saying Tom Hanks has a huge range is laughable, IMO. I'm also a big Jeffrey Wright fan. Phillip Seymour Hoffman should be on that list as well, even though the man is a prick.
Gascon You don't think Tom Hanks has range? I would think Forrest Gump (Best Actor), Apollo 13 (Best Actor Nominee), Philadelphia (Best Actor) and Saving Private Ryan were all pretty diverse. AJ22 Mel Gibson is horrible. I'm Australian and I can say that. bcdjad I quite like Al Pacino, but when you've been around as long as he has, everything becomes the same - more so for him I think. Devils Addvocate was woeful - there was something about Pacino's performance in it that irritated the heck out of me - his little tongue poke - agggh! However, I thought he was great in The Insider fadeaway I can't believe you said that Brad Pitt should be included. I rate him right up there with Keanu Reeves. Maybe I'm missing something. I voted for Gene Hackman off that list, although Spacey should probably be on it too. I like Harrison Ford, but he's a bit too deadpan in too many movies. I though he was great in Regarding Henry.
davo No, I don't think Tom Hanks has very much range. Forest Gump was not a difficult role. His roles in Apollo 13 and Saving Private Ryan were extremely similar. And just because he kissed a man in Philadelphia doesn't mean he was showing a great deal of diversity as an actor. He is very honest on screen and I love to watch him in most anything he does, but he does not have very much range. He is basically the same in all of his films, and don't even get me started on the travesty that has become the Academy Awards. When you talk about range, you talk about people like Gary Oldman and Dustin Hoffman. People like Hanks and DeNiro are great at what they do, but what they do does not demonstrate a wide range of diversity. They are honest and connected on screen, and that's enough for the American public. To show range is to show an ability to transform yourself. So when you judge an actor's range, that's what you look for. It doesn't necessarily speak against their ability, it simply describes one aspect of their artistry.
Fair enough - I guess I was just looking at diversity in the actual roles. Intellectually challenged guy, gay lawyer with aids, army captain, astronaut. When i think of someone who lacks range, I think DeNiro.
