Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only
MoS

GOAT actor stuff

Recommended Posts

Raging Bull

Godfather 2

Taxi Driver

Deer Hunter

Heat

Mean Streets

Goodfellas

Casino

Jackie Brown

King of Comedy

 

He earned the right to do all the shitty movies he wants to, that is just an untouchable list.

 

Totally agree. Add Once Upon a Time in America and The Untouchables to the list of master works, and his performances in Awakenings, Cape Fear, The Mission, 1900, The Last Tycoon and many others to the list of good films, great performances...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... This one might be far fetched, might not be...

 

Hulk Hogan = Sylvester Stallone...

 

* Flag waving, Reagan era mega star in the mid 80's.

* A ton of crap in the 90's and 00's. (Yoko match at WM9 = Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot???)

* People tend to either forget or completely underrate what a good worker he could be (Rocky, First Blood and a few select other)

* Stallone often casts himself, so it makes sense that he cast Hogan in Rocky 3...

* Continuing that idea: No one would give Sly a big break, so he wrote a part for himself, that made him a superstar (Rocky). No one would give Hogan a big break (ie the AWA title), so Stallone wrote him a part, that made him a superstar (Thunderlips)....

 

Maybe it's not that far fetched :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the Great Movie Theory and the Consistency Argument, there's only one name in the world: John Cazale. He only starred in five movies in his entire life, but ALL of them were beloved masterpieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the Great Movie Theory and the Consistency Argument, there's only one name in the world: John Cazale. He only starred in five movies in his entire life, but ALL of them were beloved masterpieces.

 

Where would someone rank if they had 5 matches, and only 5 matches. But a case could be made that they were all in the top 10 of best matches ever? At the very least in the top 10 of a single decade...

 

James Dean could be another case for the same argument. Cazale was a supporting player in all five films, Dean was star in all three of his films. And he was Oscar nominated for two and would have been nominated for all three if it was possible (East of Eden and Rebel Without a Cause competed in the same year, and actors can only be nominated once per category per year).

 

Both were among the greats though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

James Dean could be another case for the same argument. Cazale was a supporting player in all five films, Dean was star in all three of his films. And he was Oscar nominated for two and would have been nominated for all three if it was possible (East of Eden and Rebel Without a Cause competed in the same year, and actors can only be nominated once per category per year).

 

 

Haven't seen East of Eden. Re-read the book a few months ago during a Steinbeck binge. Is the film worth a watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

James Dean could be another case for the same argument. Cazale was a supporting player in all five films, Dean was star in all three of his films. And he was Oscar nominated for two and would have been nominated for all three if it was possible (East of Eden and Rebel Without a Cause competed in the same year, and actors can only be nominated once per category per year).

 

 

Haven't seen East of Eden. Re-read the book a few months ago during a Steinbeck binge. Is the film worth a watch?

 

Yes!!!! Absolutely!!! Elia Kazan at close to the peak of his powers. And James Dean in possibly the greatest starring debut in movie history. Haven't read the book in years, but back then I read the book and saw the film within a few months, and I seem to remember the film capturing the book extremely well. The movie is a masterpiece of emotion. Some will find it a little dated, but it has so much to offer. And it was right at the forefront of the acting revolution of the early to mid 50's, and it shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we just limiting this to Hollywood? Cases could be made all across TV, especially Gandolfini and Cranston obviously.

 

I say it could include everything. Hollywood, TV, Asian cinema, European, anything. That's the territories I guess. Is theater shoot style then???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For the Great Movie Theory and the Consistency Argument, there's only one name in the world: John Cazale. He only starred in five movies in his entire life, but ALL of them were beloved masterpieces.

 

Where would someone rank if they had 5 matches, and only 5 matches. But a case could be made that they were all in the top 10 of best matches ever? At the very least in the top 10 of a single decade...

 

James Dean could be another case for the same argument. Cazale was a supporting player in all five films, Dean was star in all three of his films. And he was Oscar nominated for two and would have been nominated for all three if it was possible (East of Eden and Rebel Without a Cause competed in the same year, and actors can only be nominated once per category per year).

 

Both were among the greats though.

 

 

I was coming in here to say John Cazale was Volk Han and James Dean was Kiyoshi Tamura because those guys didn't have a lot of matches but are all time greats.

 

I actually was going to say Tamura was Cazale but then I saw the post about James Dean and I decided to pair up the two weird looking guys and the two impossibly handsome guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are we just limiting this to Hollywood? Cases could be made all across TV, especially Gandolfini and Cranston obviously.

 

I say it could include everything. Hollywood, TV, Asian cinema, European, anything. That's the territories I guess. Is theater shoot style then???

 

 

Live theater is most definitely shoot-style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me John Cazale would be more like a Gino Hernandez or an Art Barr because of the way he died tragically in his prime.

 

I'm going to throw Morgan Freeman out there as the GOAT. I honestly don't think you can find somebody with a more impressive list of credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp, I will give an unpopular opinion again. To me, many of DDL's most famous performances remind me of Dean Malenko - technically flawless, but having no soul or emotion. His My Left Foot performance being a prime example. I did love him in Lincoln though, and liked him a lot in Gangs of New York.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dustin Rhodes could be like a Kevin Costner. Periods of being one of the best in the world (ability for Rhodes, star-power for Costner) followed by a big drop in quality. Made strides over the past decade with a comeback that at least puts them in the role of a consistently strong supporting player.

 

Bobby Eaton is like a John C. Reilly. Not really relied upon to a carry a match/film on starpower or charisma necessarily, but an all-star hand who does popular work when paired with a strong partner (Condrey/Lane - Hoffman/Ferrell) or with a great manager/director (PTA/Cornette, Scorsese/Heyman).

 

Jerry Lawler could be a Burt Reynolds. Looked down upon by "real" fans for being King of a niche territory/box office movie popcorn genre. Older work is much more respected now, although can still be acknowledged as a bit corny. An elder statesman with some great later performances after their prime. Evening Shade=Lawler in 90's WWF.

 

John Cena is Will Smith. Started as a rapper, became a huge star, faced with somewhat of a backlash even as his star grew bigger. Neither likes to look weak, but give great matches/performances even as they are "disliked" due to pandering or weird kids.

 

I think Nicholson is more like Randy Savage. Took a little bit of time to gain momentum but when they hit, they hit big. A decade plus of top notch work, but as they got older it became less and less likely to see classic performances although even into the late '90s was able to hit it out of the park. Always had a reputation of having a temper.

 

Flair would be De Niro, making Anderson Keitel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to think of a decent analogy for Cagney. We're missing a chunk of footage, but what we do have (The Public Enemy, The Roaring Twenties, Angels With Dirty Faces, White Heat) marks him out as a GOAT candidate. You've also got influence to consider and performing different roles (a man as comfortable hoofing through a song-and-dance number as hatching a villainous plan)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to think of a decent analogy for Cagney. We're missing a chunk of footage, but what we do have (The Public Enemy, The Roaring Twenties, Angels With Dirty Faces, White Heat) marks him out as a GOAT candidate. You've also got influence to consider and performing different roles (a man as comfortable hoofing through a song-and-dance number as hatching a villainous plan)

 

Buddy Rogers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dustin Rhodes could be like a Kevin Costner. Periods of being one of the best in the world (ability for Rhodes, star-power for Costner) followed by a big drop in quality. Made strides over the past decade with a comeback that at least puts them in the role of a consistently strong supporting player.

 

Bobby Eaton is like a John C. Reilly. Not really relied upon to a carry a match/film on starpower or charisma necessarily, but an all-star hand who does popular work when paired with a strong partner (Condrey/Lane - Hoffman/Ferrell) or with a great manager/director (PTA/Cornette, Scorsese/Heyman).

 

Jerry Lawler could be a Burt Reynolds. Looked down upon by "real" fans for being King of a niche territory/box office movie popcorn genre. Older work is much more respected now, although can still be acknowledged as a bit corny. An elder statesman with some great later performances after their prime. Evening Shade=Lawler in 90's WWF.

 

John Cena is Will Smith. Started as a rapper, became a huge star, faced with somewhat of a backlash even as his star grew bigger. Neither likes to look weak, but give great matches/performances even as they are "disliked" due to pandering or weird kids.

 

I think Nicholson is more like Randy Savage. Took a little bit of time to gain momentum but when they hit, they hit big. A decade plus of top notch work, but as they got older it became less and less likely to see classic performances although even into the late '90s was able to hit it out of the park. Always had a reputation of having a temper.

 

Flair would be De Niro, making Anderson Keitel.

 

Ha! Awesome :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MoS... I have to agree with you a little... I like DDL more as an actor than I like Dean as a wrestler, but I totally see your point. And maybe, just maybe, I'm swayed towards DDL because the movies he's been in have generally been great. But I agree with you on this more than I really want to :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Trying to think of a decent analogy for Cagney. We're missing a chunk of footage, but what we do have (The Public Enemy, The Roaring Twenties, Angels With Dirty Faces, White Heat) marks him out as a GOAT candidate. You've also got influence to consider and performing different roles (a man as comfortable hoofing through a song-and-dance number as hatching a villainous plan)

 

Buddy Rogers?

 

 

I think that's a good shout, especially in terms of influence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dustin as Costner? Beast, you like Elliott Smith so you're okay by me, but come on, dude? Costner can be Randy Orton. Dull as fuck.

 

Dustin is Jeff Bridges. Second generation, great from the get-go, kinda uninspiring middle career, but highly lauded return to the limelight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, I can handle that.

 

I was thinking more in terms of "celebrity fame" vs. "wrestling fan appreciation". But Bridges is practically perfect for Dustin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, I didn't like the Dustin as Costner comparison too. Mainly because I find Costner really boring, and I have never found Dustin boring. He has been terrible some times, but never boring.

 

Savage as Nicholson is a really on-point comparison. Down to their later career, ehich has seen them going through the motions and giving a patented but predictable performance. Still very good, of course, and sometimes great, but not the same magic you used to see.

 

And I will reiterate: in no universe, this or alternate, does Dances with Wolves beating Goodfellas for Best Picture makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been waiting awhile to get into this thread! I know it's dead atm, but just to chime in some.

 

I think the analogy to GWE has to be adjusted somewhat especially on Great Match Theory vs. Great Movie Theory. First of all, if you want to go by great match theory, it's an easier fit for movie directors than actors because directors have more control over the quality of a film, almost always, just like how a wrestler has more control over how good his promos are or match quality. Actors, for the most part, don't have that kind of authorship over their movies, unless they are huge movie stars, and usually that's still only for certain projects and while they are on top. For that reason, I'd go more by looking at performances within the movies rather than simply if the movie is good or bad because so much can depend on the script, bad editing, poor directing, etc.. Sometimes an actor can be awesome in a shitty movie (for instance, Philip Seymour Hoffman in Along Came Polly), and sometimes a movie can be quite good despite an average or weak performance.

 

 

Peter O'Toole = Flair?

Not bad :-) ... O'Toole did have some major stinkers on his resume (Caligula, Supergirl a.o.), but I guess you'd call that "old man Flair" and then the last few years where O'Toole did stuff like Venus would be Flair's retirement match and some other ok stuff... I could see that.

 

What about Flair = Jack Nicholson?

 

 

Caligula isn't a good movie, but that's not on O'Toole, I think, even if he is giving another variation of the yelling King performances he had given before.

 

Jack Nicholson I can definitely see. He got into the movies early, but he was at an older age when he started to become a star and has a lot of varied performances throughout the 70s. Then basically he becomes more and more Jack being Jack the movie star, which is awesome, but somewhat descended into self-parody at times. However, for the most part, if we look at movies as the measuring stick he stayed pretty consistent whereas Flair dropped off more. But you could argue Jack wasn't as great in some of those later roles, even the ones that worked--I liked him in the Departed, but I know some people aren't crazy about that performance even if they love the movie.

 

Their performance styles are very different but when I think of Flair and comparing him to an actor: I think of Flair as Robert De Niro. An extremely ridiculous and nice run of performances from the early/mid 70s then he starts to downshift slightly, even though he's still in many good movies for awhile, and then after about 1998 (Ronin/Jackie Brown--I love that movie!) he descends into comedy--which can be entertaining--or just phoning in it and declining. It's really striking how quickly he descened into Showtime and Rocky and Bullwinkle territory and then barely ever dug himself out. But, here and there in the last few years, he's churned out some solid, if not spectacular performances--for instance, Silver Linings Playbook and the Intern (bad movie, but solid De Niro.) Not great, but some nice flashes. Still...you look at his resume, and there's no disputing he has to be up there in the GOAT film actor discussion, and probably the guy most actors today would pick.

 

Duvall is a good call for Arn. I'd argue Philip Seymour Hoffman fits too, although he's become more acclaimed and recognized due to his death. Both were usually put into smaller supporting roles, and both were extremely consistent.

 

Depending what you think of Eastwood, I'd argue you could compare him to Stan Hansen. He's definitely got a particular style and doesn't range too much out of it, except occasionally, but he's so good at it and iconic that he can succeed with 2 pitches to force a baseball analogy. Along similar lines, Samuel L. Jackson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×