Anthony Hopkins says 'Im not a great actor, Im a fluke.' What do you think?
A strong majority would believe that Sir Anthony Hopkins is one of Britain's greatest modern actors. nevertheless, he states that he is not a 'great' or one of the most talented actors.
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/hopkins---i-m-not-a-great-actor--140040751.html
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/hopkins---i-m-not-a-great-actor--140040751.html
0
Comments
Give me Anthony anyday over the likes of Michael Caine, Colin firth etc
Now Michael Caine really is a fluke. What's strange is that he's only started being considered a 'great' since he's reached his dotage. No one took him seriously when he was hamming it up in 'The Swarm' or 'Beyond the Poseidon Adventure'.
Completely. I actually think his perfomance (and Emma Thompson's) made the film in some ways better than the book.
I seem to remember Hopkins saying he was amazed at his Oscar nomination for that film, in which he was required to show no emotion at all, in other words he got the nomination for NOT acting !!
Too true. Hammed up Lecter compared to Brian Cox who delivered a very understated performance
The Ipcress File, Alfie, Play Dirty, The Italian Job, Get Carter, Sleuth ('72), The Man Who Would be King, Dressed to Kill, Deathtrap, Educating Rita, Hannah and her Sisters, Mona Lisa, Blood and Wine, Little Voice, The Cider House Rules, The Quiet American...
Sure, the dross piles up as the years progress. But fluke? Far from it.
Thanks for sticking up for Caine. As you say, amongst all the dross he's done to earn money, he has turned in some fantastic performances. When he wants to, and when he has a decent script, he's an amazing actor.
Although I would have taken 'The Italian Job' (fun film, but not great) from your list and included 'Children Of Men' instead.
This old chestnut again.
IN SOTL Hopkins was brilliant, and far superior to Cox.
The two others he did , were pantomime stuff yes.
Also don't agree with the tired old Brain Cox was better in Manhunter line as well. Sick of hearing it; its just a twaddle line originally invented by stuck up critics trying to pretend they were clever by having seen the 1st attempt at filming the books. Hopkins totally outclassed him and made Lecter an iconic character. Speaking as someone who has read the books I always felt Hopkins is closer to the book's version of Hannibal than anyone else. He just really gets under your skin...quite erm literally!:eek::D;)
Ha ha! I was trying to post a similar list last night but bloody Safari kept crashing. I left off The Italian Job as well - he was just playing around in that. I'd include Harry Brown in the list - practically a masterclass in film acting by Caine. It's a shame everyone else in it was shite.
All great actors have done their share of Hollywood whoring. De Niro's been in those ghastly Fokkers 'comedies' so no-one's immune.
I'm inclined to agree with you. It's now fashionable to slag off Silence of the Lambs as populist trash but it remains an excellent film and not just for Hopkins' performance.
Nowt to do with being fashionable, I've disliked it since the moment I saw it.
Who in particular?
Fashionable? Pfft. I never liked it because of Hopkins.
Seriously though, I had problems with the film as a whole, but accepted that it may be popular because of the performances from Hopkins and Jodie Foster. I'm not that keen on both, even though I have a soft spot for Foster, in a sense of growing up with her existence as a 'big sister'. Weird, but you know what I mean. Well, I hope so, anyway.