 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Texas he was more of a teen idol.
Think he did not have enough films made to deeply estabilish himself as a good character actor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 26, 2005 - 11:42 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
shicorp
(Member)
|
I have brought up this topic on several other message boards the last days. Dean, without any doubt, is one of the major screen appearances of the last century (and I hope, he remains that way in the next century). In fact, I have spent a lot of time thinking about the events that happened fifty years ago and perhaps it makes it even more fascinating for me, as I was never a part of this era, but was born thirty years after JD's passing.
By reading biographies on the web, you will find a whole load of information, that makes him even more interesting. He played not only Jim Stark, but he actually WAS Jim Stark. Of course, there are a lot of questions that will remain unanswered, now that many of the people who worked with Dean have also passed, but I guess, that's what keeps the legend alive. We can only hope, that once time machines will be invented and then 9/30/55 may be averted. (then there are a lot more September events in human history, that should be averted...)
Anyway, I guess, this is one of the saddest stories in Hollywood history. Fortunately, JD has left us three classic Hollywood movies to enjoy, although you can never really enjoy them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought he was a ham, and 'Rebel', for me, is one of the worst performances in screen history. Not sure how he would have developed, if he had lived; but all I ever saw was someone who was far too concerned with himself, to ever really be able to perform, effectively to the piece.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 26, 2005 - 12:00 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
shicorp
(Member)
|
John,
from a former comment I see, that you really do not like JD. Maybe I'm a bit sentimental about this (and I think, that many fans of his are), but I think, he was not supposed to give a performance, as he himself was the performance. As I've already mentioned above, he didn't only play Jim Stark, but he was the character and it seems, if the characters in "Rebel Without A Cause" were even developed for the actors during filming of the movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 28, 2005 - 8:49 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Dana Wilcox
(Member)
|
Unfathomably overrated, like Brando.
It is possible to select out certain of Brando's performances and conclude from these that Brando was "overrated" as an actor. In fact, at a certain point in his life Brando's interest in acting became mainly as a means to finance his lavish (excessive!) lifestyle. As such, he frequently took roles mainly for the dough, and invested little of himself in those roles. I would term him "inconsistent" as an actor, in that he could not be depended upon to give a conscientious performance. At his best, he was extraordinary, with A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE and THE GODFATHER as examples of his great talent in action. I'm sure there are more of the same that could be cited, but also a regrettable number of examples of careless and disinterested performances. To me it seems rather glib to dismiss Brando as "overrated," however, at least as I understand the term's meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dean- like Brando in the '50s- was a unique talent, in the same way that the composers for some of their films (North and Rosenman) were a breath of fresh air and similarly unique talents.
They were not over-rated, just misunderstood -and presumably still are, judging by at least one opinion here; obviously by somebody who does not realise that both these actors had a genius that has only now become really apparent. Compared to what passes as talent in acting these days, Dean and Brando were just amazing - and of course also iconoclastic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Oct 3, 2005 - 5:26 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
Dean- like Brando in the '50s- was a unique talent, in the same way that the composers for some of their films (North and Rosenman) were a breath of fresh air and similarly unique talents.
They were not over-rated, just misunderstood -and presumably still are, judging by at least one opinion here; obviously by somebody who does not realise that both these actors had a genius that has only now become really apparent. Compared to what passes as talent in acting these days, Dean and Brando were just amazing - and of course also iconoclastic.
Well said, Rednose. I have to wonder if Dean had lived as long as Brando, would Dean's career have been like Brando's, given their similar temperaments. Would we be watching a body of work that consisted of a series of interesting failures with flashes of the old brilliance as well as the occasional masterpiece? Clift went the same way, destroyed by excess and tragic injuries. I love Brando's work, but after On the Waterfront, his films became consistent in their inconsistencies. It's a damned shame, but no less interesting to watch.
np: Mutiny On the Bounty (Disc 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Oct 3, 2005 - 5:27 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
manderley
(Member)
|
.....There's a CD out, on which JD can be heard playing the bongos.....
Curiously, shicorp, many, many years ago someone gave me a homemade reel-to-reel tape they found in a flea market in the San Fernando Valley, which has, on one side, Dean playing the bongos, and on the other side, Dean rehearsing his lines for GIANT!
As far as I recall, the bongo playing is different from that which appeared on the old bootleg 45 and 10" lp years and years ago, and the GIANT material I've never seen turn up anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time for a bump. Hard to believe that 5 years have passed...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, Brando is a very quiet actor for the most part -- often barely moving and just letting his thought processes show through his eyes -- so I'm not sure your criticism would apply to him across the board. He seldom bounces off the walls in anything. While he is known for having a smoldering physical presence -- I don't think he offends in the way you describe. When he does display thought and emotion in physical actions they tend to be precise, brief, and relatively "small" -- as when he plucks one of the errant feathers out of the air in "A Streetcar Named Desire" -- or when he pets the cat in his lap in "The Godfather." At least that is my overall impression, which may be skewed.
Dean did like to move! -- and personally I find his use of physical space to be quite spectacular and often breathtaking. I recall that Kazan said in an interview that one of the things that stood out in Dean's performances was his almost balletic sense of movement -- that he tended to physicalize his thought processes and turn them into gestures, etc. Perhaps that is what drives you crazy about his performances -- which I often find to be quite grand, graceful, and poetic.
But we all can't agree -- which is a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
