He was very out of place in this role. He looked like he was trying so hard to feel comfortable; but he looked more out of place than Damon did in the Green Zone among Middle Easterns.
Like many of these selections, there could be an argument for the writing; but what I got from this performance was awful timing, forced wittiness, melodrama at the wrong times, and a grating voice.
The film had potential to be a grand sequel, but it failed and this was due in large part to Moore.
I blame this disappointing movie completely on him, because every Farrelly Brother film beforehand was pure hilarious fun. He made it so uncomfortable to watch, and I never knew if he was trying to be funny or just trying to act enough to make it microscopically believable.
This could have been one of the best westerns in the last 30 years, seriously. There was one problem: The horrid, unbearably annoying Zellwegger made me cringe and want to fast forward through every one of her scenes, which to the film's demise, covered a rather large portion of screen time.
An extremely distasteful portrayal of a Japanese landlord in what is otherwise a very tasteful film. It's mind boggling how out-of-place this role was.
This film had fantastic potential, but it only left me agitated. Not because of Megan Fox's acting, but because of the three listed above. I like Turturro when he's with the Coen Brothers or Spike Lee, otherwise he makes terrible decisions and is not funny. Who's less funny? Anderson, who's horrible dumb-guy computer geek portrayal displaced any remaining interest I had in the film, and Julie White (the mom) succeeded in forcing me to walk out of the theatre for a few moments because I was so annoyed with her and the 3-story robots playing hide-and-seek with her in their neighborhood.
In one of the most believable superhero films ever, Holmes managed to be the opposite, with every moment she's one screen. I felt embarrassment for Liam Neeson, being in the same film as she.
Casting-decision redemption: Maggie Gyllenhaal in "The Dark Knight" - Thank God!
It's hard to say who ruined this disappointing prequel more, the kid or Jar-Jar Binks. Since the latter isn't an actor, we'll choose the kid. With the thousands of kids trying out for this most-prestigious role (for a kid) how on earth (or Tatooine) did they think Jake Lloyd could play the role correctly? I was embarrassed for Liam Neeson, being in the same film as he.
Maybe since they made such a horrible decision with the first one, they needed to top it off with a winy, chalk-board-scratching, abundantly untalented actor like Christiansen.
Now I know why Liam Neeson wasn't in this one.
The only good thing about this guy is the fact that he's so horrible to watch we really do want to hate Darth Vader and want him to die, unfortunately it's for unintended reasons.
Maybe it's Will Ferrell's, Amy Poehler's, and everyone else who's hilarious in this movie's fault, because Jon Heder was completely out of place and managed to stay away from uttering a single comedic line as the co-lead in a comedy film. Imagine how much funnier this film would have been with Ben Stiller or Owen Wilson, or even someone who's never done a comedy in his life, like Russell Crowe - he probably could have been funnier!
He's basically ruined any film he's done in the 90's and 00's (with the exception of 'The Lion King' and he nearly did there, too. But that's probably because he went up against one of the greatest voices in cinema - Jeremy Irons)
This one could top all of them, because not only does he ruin every scene he's in, he ruins other people's performances while they're on-screen with him. I saw absolutely no chemistry with any of the actors and felt uncomfortable throughout.
I realize he was supposed to be unfit for the Army, in the end. But he was truly unfit for this film. I felt like Gere probably yelled, "What the FUCK are you doing to this movie!" after every cut.
I could probably say this about every one of his films up until The Departed (he's been decent since), but most of them would probably have been average even without him (except for the brilliant "Boogie Nights", not even he could harm that film). I just felt like he was struggling with his lines in every scene and his poor acting really jumped out of the screen when going up against such a quality ensemble.
Who's worse than Wahlberg at getting hooked up with awesome roles in movies they don't deserve to be in? Keanu!! What the hell were the producers thinking with this?? This film had everything going for it, and then Keanu showed up.
I may be in the minority when I discuss how I like this film. It's when I first fell in love with Beckinsale and it covers one of the more intriguing WWII stories. I also really enjoy sweeping epics. What I don't enjoy is having to sit and watch a mumbling, pretty-faced, mimbo, try and make us believe a word of what he's saying and actually care at all about his character. He was so bad that for the only time in my life I actually felt sorry for Affleck.
I really enjoy firefighting films and TV shows (Rescue Me) so I was pretty excited about this one, but then... the Phoenix dropped by and left a disgustingly putrid bag of worthless overwrought shit that will be undoubtably impossible to ever replicate such a dubious achievement. I almost went bald after watching this film, from pulling my hair out in every disheartening scene he was in. He brought it down from a potential 4/5 to a 1/5 stars.
Basically he is too good for the role. The chemistry was off and the script was bad. Perhaps he did the best he could; but it looks like he just wanted to get this project over with from day one.
I have a very hard time believing anyone could possibly find Susan Surandon sexy in the very least. I would rather hook-up with Charlize Theron in 'Monster'.
How he won a Best Actor Oscar will remain one of the greatest mysteries of film. He looks completely lost in every one of his roles, but I choose this one because most of his films have no potential to begin with. I was hoping his character would get shot or get truly lost, anything really, throughout the entire film.
This guy should really go in the Hall of Fame of the wrongly-cast, if there were one. And if there were, maybe that would mean, to the delight of most of us, that actor is forever banned from the silver screen.
You could make the case that the acting in this film is quite poor all around, but he's at the heart of this film that had such potential before hiring one of the most gag-inducing actors of his generation.
Did the hiring director for this film owe Biggs a favor, because that is honestly the only reason why he could have possibly been chosen to play this part. What an absolute waste.
I love Amy Adams, but I have absolutely no idea what she's doing in this film! She was a big part in the severe falling-apart of this film's second-half.
I have never wanted to punch someone in the face so much, not even Mark Wahlberg in "The Happening"... ok, I take that back; but at least that was a disaster with or without Wahlberg.
What in the heeeeeell did the Farrelly Brothers and Jim Carrey see in this retched haggard impossibly annoying woman? I love this film, and can only bare watching it multiple times because Carrey is awesome and I just imagine deep into my mind that's Sienna Miller on screen instead.
Another ensemble cast, but they missed more marks in this one. Cannon's unbelievably over-dramatic-and-not-an-ounce-of-believability performance at the end, Fishbourne's horrible version of a mentor/chef, and Moore's lazy effort to portray a woman with feeling, are the dubious stand outs.
Redeeming character in this ensemble cast: Surprisingly, Ashton Kutchar.
Does Liam Neeson have a clause in his contract that he must work with at least one terrible miscast talent? He must be aglutton for acting ineptitude, because Bloom is nothing but bad in this.
This film wasn't ever great, but at least it had Mary Tyler Moore and Julie Andrews, who are always a delight. Halfway through this movie, the entertainment value took a dive when Carol Channing showed up and proceeded to irritate every nerve in my body. "Raspberries!"
Is this guy a nerdy stoner/doofus? I wanted to punch him as much as Sarah Silverman; while still being on Black's side. It tugged at my emotions but all in the wrong way.
The producers had a great idea for this film, then they decided to ruin the shit out of it when it came to casting. Whitaker looking lost as usual, with his hand=held camera, Fox trying desperately, and Quaid showing up for the paycheck and putting in minimal effort.
Never again, please.
Another ensemble cast and another couple of duds. In this dynamic film that easily moved me in many ways, I found it unbearably hard to feel anything for their two characters. They seemed out of place and forced into any emotion.
She is usually very likable but not in this film. Maybe she played the roll how she was supposed to; but either way I had no interest in her character and it lowered my interest in the film.
I had to stick Walker on this list because he's one of my favorite horrible actors. The thing is, he's only in bad movies, and I didn't include him in his only other good movie, "Varsity Blues", because it was the first movie I had seen him in and it was a high school movie, he wasn't exactly acting in a field of high-brow actors.
While this is a small role, he still managed to stick out like a birch branch. It was like he got time warped from the 90's to the 40's.
She made me hate her before we were supposed to hate her. She represents the a group of actors who have absolutely no talent, and online Cameron Diaz (at the time), her looks don't make up for it.
I stopped finding Jolie attractive for several years now, so with her relying on her looks caused her performance to be about as dull as shit, and even shit at a molecular level would boast more exciting energy.
Keanu in a Shakespeare film?? Who's idea was this?
Stehako's rating:
UPDATED MARCH 2011
Maybe it was the writing or the director, but I have many reasons to believe the following actors were wrongly put into roles that eventually ruined a potentially great film.
Luckily some of these films are so good they still didn't matter.
You've really done your research, great work! I thought the Jurassic Park sequel was actually scarier than the original. One more you might want to look at: Adrien Brody in Cadillac Records. He seems so out of place and gets out-acted by everyone in the movie, especially by all the black musician actors and even Beyonce.
i thought renee zellweger gave an impressive performance in cold mountain--just think of her varied roles--bridget jones-- nurse betty---miss potter---novalene price in 'the whole wide world'--- she is an excellent actress
You made some interesting points...but I can't agree with you on Susan Sarandon in Bull Durham...I found her extremely sexy in that film...in fact it was that performance that made me take notice of her
I think you typed this list too fast, but it worths. I still can't understand why Keanu Reeves could act many bad roles after 'The Matrix', totally agree about him. But Forrest Whitaker is not that bad.
As for the Anakin characters in the Star Wars prequels, you gotta really give them credit. I don't like Hayden Christiansen either but I don't think he had a lot to work with. Look at Natalie Portman and Ewan McGregor; both of them are fine acting talents and they looked clueless in all those movies. Even Samuel L Jackson was very out of place in those movies as some negotiating peaceful Jedi (Jackson is best when he's yelling, if they wanted a good older, wiser Jedi Master, I think Morgan Freeman is a better choice)
The only one I don't agree with you on is John Wayne. That's a poor movie indeed, but I found him to be a fine actor. He plays great cowboys, but I do agree that he's overrated. Great westerns, but I never liked him in those war movies he did, and I also think he could have played a villain at least once in his long career (same with Cary Grant), considering most other leading men in the golden years of Hollywood (Bogart and Cagney for example had no problem showing they could play villains and not just the good guy all the time) would play a villain from time to time.
I absolutely love your comment on Angelina Jolie and with my whole heart I agree, thank you that made my morning a blessed one!
Explore
Forums
Join Listal
Movies
TV Shows
DVDs
Music
Books
Games
Lists
Reviews
Images
591 
6.6 
6.9 
By the way, it's Forest (only one R) and Hayden ChrisTENSEN.
and renee too
As for the Anakin characters in the Star Wars prequels, you gotta really give them credit. I don't like Hayden Christiansen either but I don't think he had a lot to work with. Look at Natalie Portman and Ewan McGregor; both of them are fine acting talents and they looked clueless in all those movies. Even Samuel L Jackson was very out of place in those movies as some negotiating peaceful Jedi (Jackson is best when he's yelling, if they wanted a good older, wiser Jedi Master, I think Morgan Freeman is a better choice)
The only one I don't agree with you on is John Wayne. That's a poor movie indeed, but I found him to be a fine actor. He plays great cowboys, but I do agree that he's overrated. Great westerns, but I never liked him in those war movies he did, and I also think he could have played a villain at least once in his long career (same with Cary Grant), considering most other leading men in the golden years of Hollywood (Bogart and Cagney for example had no problem showing they could play villains and not just the good guy all the time) would play a villain from time to time.
I absolutely love your comment on Angelina Jolie and with my whole heart I agree, thank you that made my morning a blessed one!