Top 5

Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

Movies that weren't very good but one character's perfromance was the only redeeming quality.

5. Sean Penn in She's So Lovely 

4. John Cusack in 1408

3. Kevin Spacey in K-PAX

2. Ben Kingsley in House Of Sand And Fog

1. Will Smith in I Am Legend 

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

This is a tough Top Five because 1) you have to judge two things, the movie and the acting, and 2) usually we remember good acting in good movies because that is what has the impact to be memorable.

So with my feeble mind, I'll just mention something I've seen recently:

Tilda Swinton AND Tom Wilkinson in Michael Clayton (what a stereotypical, predictable, been-done-before, unimaginative movie, saved by lots of excellent acting)

JIMBELL

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

leeroy711:

2. Ben Kingsley in House Of Sand And Fog

What did you find Sub-Par about House of Sand and Fog?

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

Risselada:

leeroy711:

2. Ben Kingsley in House Of Sand And Fog

What did you find Sub-Par about House of Sand and Fog?

I just had a hard time with that film, it started slow and seemed that everytime it began to pick up some momentum, it would go through a lull again. I also tend to look forward to anything Ben Kingsley does so if one of his films doesn't wow me, I will be a bit more put off than usual. I could see why others might like it but it just wasn't a movie for me.

Of course, if enough people tell me it was a good movie, I'll be forced to watch it again and possible revise my opinion.

The obvious follow-up question to you would be, what did you like about it? 

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

leeroy711:

Risselada:

leeroy711:

2. Ben Kingsley in House Of Sand And Fog

What did you find Sub-Par about House of Sand and Fog?

 

I just had a hard time with that film, it started slow and seemed that everytime it began to pick up some momentum, it would go through a lull again. I also tend to look forward to anything Ben Kingsley does so if one of his films doesn't wow me, I will be a bit more put off than usual. I could see why others might like it but it just wasn't a movie for me.

Of course, if enough people tell me it was a good movie, I'll be forced to watch it again and possible revise my opinion.

The obvious follow-up question to you would be, what did you like about it? 

Well like you said it may have a lot to do with expectations.  You look forward to a Ben Kingsley movie and if it doesn't turn out to be phenomenal, that would be "sub-par" for you.  In the case of House of Sand and Fog I can't remember if I knew anything about it before watching it.  It was at a time when I worked at a video store and was able to rent new movies for free before they came out, and sometimes I would just take them home and stick them in without knowing much about them.  I think that was what happened here, but I can't remember for sure now.  Basically I had no expectations, and although I don't think the movie is perfect, I thought it quite better than average.  To me the word par means average.  So I would not consider this movie "sub-par".  I thought the acting was phenomenal, and the story did an amazing job of making you see two sides of a story where two people feel like they have equal right to the same thing, but only one of them can have it.  Somehow you care for both sides and see how they could both feel like they deserve it more, and understand how each side could see the other side as being malicious to stand in their way.

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

Risselada:

leeroy711:

Risselada:

leeroy711:

2. Ben Kingsley in House Of Sand And Fog

What did you find Sub-Par about House of Sand and Fog?

 

I just had a hard time with that film, it started slow and seemed that everytime it began to pick up some momentum, it would go through a lull again. I also tend to look forward to anything Ben Kingsley does so if one of his films doesn't wow me, I will be a bit more put off than usual. I could see why others might like it but it just wasn't a movie for me.

Of course, if enough people tell me it was a good movie, I'll be forced to watch it again and possible revise my opinion.

The obvious follow-up question to you would be, what did you like about it? 

Well like you said it may have a lot to do with expectations.  You look forward to a Ben Kingsley movie and if it doesn't turn out to be phenomenal, that would be "sub-par" for you.  In the case of House of Sand and Fog I can't remember if I knew anything about it before watching it.  It was at a time when I worked at a video store and was able to rent new movies for free before they came out, and sometimes I would just take them home and stick them in without knowing much about them.  I think that was what happened here, but I can't remember for sure now.  Basically I had no expectations, and although I don't think the movie is perfect, I thought it quite better than average.  To me the word par means average.  So I would not consider this movie "sub-par".  I thought the acting was phenomenal, and the story did an amazing job of making you see two sides of a story where two people feel like they have equal right to the same thing, but only one of them can have it.  Somehow you care for both sides and see how they could both feel like they deserve it more, and understand how each side could see the other side as being malicious to stand in their way.

I have to say I disagree, I actually didn't find anything phenomenal about Jennifer Connely's acting & I really don't like Ron Eldard. Kingsley was incredible as always but I found that, for whatever reason, I didn't really care about the other characters. When I think of that movie with Kingsley's character played by a lessor actor, I would have probably considered to be barely watchable. But I digress, maybe I was just having a bad day. I will have to fit it in my queue and give it a second chance. 

It is interesting though, to consider all of the movies I think I would have enjoyed more if it weren't for higher expections.

BTW I too worked at a video store, about 8 years ago and took full advantage of the free rental policy. HMMMM........that sounds like another top 5 list in itself: Top 5 video store employee sleeper hits (or something).......... does porn count?? 

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

leeroy711:

I have to say I disagree, I actually didn't find anything phenomenal about Jennifer Connely's acting & I really don't like Ron Eldard. Kingsley was incredible as always but I found that, for whatever reason, I didn't really care about the other characters. When I think of that movie with Kingsley's character played by a lessor actor, I would have probably considered to be barely watchable. But I digress, maybe I was just having a bad day. I will have to fit it in my queue and give it a second chance. 

It is interesting though, to consider all of the movies I think I would have enjoyed more if it weren't for higher expections.

BTW I too worked at a video store, about 8 years ago and took full advantage of the free rental policy. HMMMM........that sounds like another top 5 list in itself: Top 5 video store employee sleeper hits (or something).......... does porn count?? 

Well even if you disagree me with me on those points, there is at least one aspect of the movie that I hope you won't disagree with me about.  Roger Deakins's cinematography is superb and adds so much.

I'm not sure if there is any straight up porn that's even listed on Spout.  I know at one store I worked at all of the porn had star ratings written on the VSH labels in pen.  Someone had apparently rented everything we had at one point and added his own personal ratings and little notes.

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

Risselada:

leeroy711:

I have to say I disagree, I actually didn't find anything phenomenal about Jennifer Connely's acting & I really don't like Ron Eldard. Kingsley was incredible as always but I found that, for whatever reason, I didn't really care about the other characters. When I think of that movie with Kingsley's character played by a lessor actor, I would have probably considered to be barely watchable. But I digress, maybe I was just having a bad day. I will have to fit it in my queue and give it a second chance. 

It is interesting though, to consider all of the movies I think I would have enjoyed more if it weren't for higher expections.

BTW I too worked at a video store, about 8 years ago and took full advantage of the free rental policy. HMMMM........that sounds like another top 5 list in itself: Top 5 video store employee sleeper hits (or something).......... does porn count?? 

Well even if you disagree me with me on those points, there is at least one aspect of the movie that I hope you won't disagree with me about.  Roger Deakins's cinematography is superb and adds so much.

I'm not sure if there is any straight up porn that's even listed on Spout.  I know at one store I worked at all of the porn had star ratings written on the VSH labels in pen.  Someone had apparently rented everything we had at one point and added his own personal ratings and little notes.

As far as the phantom porn rater from your store is concerned, I plead the fifth. 

Re:Top 5 Performances in Sub-Par movies

five that come to mind...............

Gene Hackman - French Connection II - The French Connection II (1975)

Jim Carrey - The Number 23 - The Number 23 (2007)

Philip Seymore Hoffmann - The Savages - The Savages (2007)

Richard Gere - Pretty Woman - Pretty Woman (1990)

Cate Blanchett - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)