Moniker wrote:
In recent years, I think several actors have aged like fine wine: primarily, Viggo Mortenson & Leo DiCaprio. To a lesser extent, Collin Farrell and Hugh Jackman.
...ok hold on.
boagman wrote:
Absolutely with you on Leo, as I used to despise him and now I can watch him and enjoy him from time to time. His time spent under the auspices of Scorcese has definitely helped him be a better, far more believable actor, and not just a pretty face. Is he perfect? No, but he's a much, *much* better actor than he was a decade ago, for sure.
Absolute nonsense. I'm very tired of hearing the DiCaprio couldn't act before fallacy that seems to be a fashionable dinner statement with no grounding in reality. The 'pretty face' statement is of course key to the general population's misunderstanding of acting and appraisal of 'character' - in this caze disliking the heartthrob because he's a teen idol.
It's tres ridiculous. Di Caprio could act since day one. He was a fine child actor and showed even more versatility in The Basketball Diaries, Romeo and Juliet and Titanic arguably than he does in older age, where his repertoire seems to have boiled down to a smaller canvas. That said, he's still very strong, one of Hollywood's best products in acting ability - and his film-stealing performance in Django is undoubtedly the finest of his career to date. To that end I'd say he's matured, but he's never been unable to act.
He's just *terrible*.
Actually Colin Farrell isn't terrible, but most if his movies are. Rapoon mentions Tigerland which is his first major movie, but actually he's a bit shit in that one: 100% egoism and suffering early Tom Cruise plasticity as a result.
But he turned out to be half-decent. Nothing too special but certainly more capable than many of his peers, surprisingly.
@Moniker: Viggo is another one who gets high praise because character. As an actor he's actually a bit of a single note affair. I like him actually, but he doesn't have much range - no DiCaprio, put it that way.
