In his defense, what makes Ledger so ****ing great, really? Granted, he wasn't a terrible actor, but some great like a Tom Hanks, Jeff Bridges or Jack Nicholson? Nah, not even close.
Look at the collection of his work, where are his roles that standout and shine about the rest? Brokeback Mountain is the only truly great performance he had.
If he had lived, it's possible he would have grown into some superb actor, but his early death is no reason to worship the man.
Originally posted by Davis Bloome
Meh, I could care less if anyone doesn't think Ledger is great, because at the end of the day, to me, my opinion is the only one that matters to me.
And in turn we'll put that straight back to you and say that noone cares about your opinion...So there's no point in you posting anymore...bye.
Originally posted by Robtard
In his defense, what makes Ledger so ****ing great, really? Granted, he wasn't a terrible actor, but some great like a Tom Hanks, Jeff Bridges or Jack Nicholson? Nah, not even close.Look at the collection of his work, where are his roles that standout and shine about the rest? Brokeback Mountain is the only truly great performance he had.
If he had lived, it's possible he would have grown into some superb actor, but his early death is no reason to worship the man.
First off, despite how overhyped it may or may not be, Ledger's Joker was truly great. That coupled with Brokeback Mountain hinted that the guy had a promising career ahead of him and I think you hit the nail on the head: people believe that he would've become one of the greats if he hadn't died.
Plus, it looks like he did a pretty good job in this Parnassus flick, based on the few clips out there.
Quality doesn't translate into "great", as fact. There are many actors who have "quality" roles under their belt here and there, doesn't make them great actors.
Kurt Russel is a prime example, many a "quality" role; not many would label him a "great actor?"
So for Heath, we have BBM and arguably TDK(though his death helped the hype here greatly), so one, maybe two.
Naw, Heath was great in Lords Of Dogtown, he was the best thing about that movie. I suggest renting it just to see his character. He played Skip Engblom, a surf bum who ran the Zephyr Surf Shop who sponsored the skaters when they started out. He's classic. It's my favorite Heath roll. Also he was great in A Knight's Tale, very funny and charismatic. And in Monster's Ball, as Billy Bob Thorton's suicidal son, his role was short but very profound. I think Heath is great.
Originally posted by Robtard
Quality doesn't translate into "great", as fact. There are many actors who have "quality" roles under their belt here and there, doesn't make them great actors.Kurt Russel is a prime example, many a "quality" role; not many would label him a "great actor?"
So for Heath, we have BBM and arguably TDK(though his death helped the hype here greatly), so one, maybe two.
Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
Naw, Heath was great in Lords Of Dogtown, he was the best thing about that movie. I suggest renting it just to see his character. He played Skip Engblom, a surf bum who ran the Zephyr Surf Shop who sponsored the skaters when they started out. He's classic. It's my favorite Heath roll. Also he was great in A Knight's Tale, very funny and charismatic. And in Monster's Ball, as Billy Bob Thorton's suicidal son, his role was short but very profound. I think Heath is great.
Also, it looks like I'll have to watch Lorgs of Dogtown now.
Originally posted by Impediment
Heath Ledger was, in fact, a great, young actor who died prematurely.Was he up to, say, the caliber of Marlon Brando, Orson Welles, or, even, Jack Nicholson? Hell no.
He didn't deserve the Oscar. 'Twas a mercy vote.
I'm so sick of people saying that. Why didn't he deserve the Oscar? Who deserved it more than him? Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder? No. Michael Shannon? Nope. Josh Brolin? Nope.
I haven't seen Doubt, but, despite Philip Seymour Hoffman being a fantastic actor (I like him better than Ledger), I can't imagine he did a better job with that role than Heath did in TDK.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it was a pity/mercy vote, that doesn't downgrade the quality of his performance. The performance is still there, it's still intact in the film so why does it hypothetically being a mercy vote mean that he didn't deserve it regardless?
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Well I said quality "performances," not roles. That may sound nitpicky, but there's a difference imo. And if quality performances don't make a great actor, then what the hell does?
Not to be picky, but there isn't a difference, a role is a performance and a performance is a role, as actors generally perform roles(characters).
To answer your question, great performances make great actors, preferably more than just one, else Cuba Gooding Jr. might be labeled a "great actor."
I've been quite vocal about Heath being a moron about getting killed and I've pratically debunked the blind "oh, he died because of timing" myth.
But, I must say that of ALL the movies I've seen, one of my favorite characters of ANY film was Heath's Joker. But I like him in that role for different reasons than most, I think: I lmao'd any time he was on screen. I was laughing just as hard as he was when Batman kept punching him. Oh man. 😆 just remembering it makes me laugh.
More on topic, the movie can't be that bad. Heath or no Heath. 🙂
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I'm so sick of people saying that. Why didn't he deserve the Oscar? Who deserved it more than him? Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder? No. Michael Shannon? Nope. Josh Brolin? Nope.I haven't seen Doubt, but, despite Philip Seymour Hoffman being a fantastic actor (I like him better than Ledger), I can't imagine he did a better job with that role than Heath did in TDK.
Probably not as sick as the people who watched all those roles nominated and know it was indeed giving to him out of respect and because of the hysterical hype on the Joker portrayal because of the death.
Hoffman was better
Shannon was better (though Ledger is a better actor overall)
Downey Jr. was better
Originally posted by Robtard
Not to be picky, but there isn't a difference, a role is a performance and a performance is a role, as actors generally perform roles(characters).To answer your question, great performances make great actors, preferably more than just one, else Cuba Gooding Jr. might be labeled a "great actor."
I guess we'll agree to disagree on the whole role vs. performance thing then. Because, an actor could be given a shitty role (or character) and make it memorable with a great performance. See?
But the point that people are trying to make is that Heath Ledger has demonstrated multiple great performances. There are probably some that you haven't seen.