MovieChat Forums > Tom Hanks Discussion > Why is he considered great? I don't get ...

Why is he considered great? I don't get it.

posted 25 days ago by BlackMass (988)
18 replies | jump to latest

Hanks can deliver lines, and he can be quite likeable on screen. But I don't see greatness in the guy, and never did. He has very limited range, unable to vary his act or convincingly play anything but the naive good guy. He's not even attractive and has a long, bean-like head.

I remember seeing him on a Hollywood Reporter roundtable with Willem Dafoe, Gary Oldman and Sam Rockwell, and almost marvelling at how inferior he is to those guys, despite being a bigger star.

[–] greenvelvet (166) 2 days ago

He has an incredibly good PR team that has built up a (actual) nice guy image around him. He picks his roles very carefully and always plays nice guys. Being able to maintain that for decades is his real acting.

[–] DoctorThirteen (13920) 2 days ago

I'm the same. He leaves me completely cold.

[–] AnthonySocksss (447) 2 days ago

Saying he has limited range is boneheaded. He’s played asshole characters in multiple movies (League of their own, Toy Story, Ladykillers, cloud atlas). The reason he’s a bigger star is because he can easily carry a whole film by himself and is always the main attraction.

Also Gary Oldman is overrated af

[–] BlackMass (988) 2 days ago

Lol at Woody being an "asshole character". Hanks doesn't have the chops to pull off the bad guy.

Oldman is far more influential than Hanks. People like Brad Pitt, Christian Bale and Tom Hardy literally became actors because of Oldman. Bitter that he's one of the few actors to reject the leftoid narratives you hold so dear?

[–] AnthonySocksss (447) 2 days ago

An overrated actor spawned three more overrated actors, how coincidental.

[–] BlackMass (988) 2 days ago

Yet they're all vastly more dynamic and capable than bean head.

[–] AnthonySocksss (447) a day ago

lol no, Tom hardy speaks like he has gravel in his mouth, Christian bale does the stupid throat noise thing, and Brad Pitt acts like a plank of wood.

[–] HarrySkywalker (694) 2 days ago

You're joking, right?

Tom Hanks is one of the best living actors and he has a huge range.

And trying to compare Willem Dafoe, Gary Oldman and Sam Rockwell with him is hilarious!

William Dafoe? LMAO! And yet you claim Tom Hanks "is not even attractive"?!

[–] BlackMass (988) 2 days ago

Trying to compare Willem Dafoe, Gary Oldman and Sam Rockwell with him is hilarious!

I know, right? Those guys are so far ahead of Hanks, it's ridiculous.

William Dafoe? LMAO! And yet you claim Tom Hanks "is not even attractive"?!

Watch 'Body of Evidence'. Dafoe also has a huge penis.

[–] HarrySkywalker (694) 20 hours ago

Yeah, it's absolutely ridiculous you trying to compare thsoe awful actors comapred to the GOAT Tom Hanks. Fact.

And I'm not gay, therefore I can't appreciate that from the awful William Dafoe. LMAO!

[–] BlackMass (988) 15 hours ago

Lol, a mental defective who thinks dynamic brilliance like Dafoe, Oldman and Rockwell are "awful", and who rates a by-the-numbers "movie star" as the GOAT.

And who's this "William Dafoe" you keep referring to? Heck, you don't even know the work of actors you're dismissing as awful.

I suppose I shouldn't be picking on someone with a single-digit IQ.

[–] TandyMan (11096) 2 days ago

He blew everybody's socks off by successfully transitioning from comedy to drama and had a very relatable charm when young. He also managed a string of back to back to back hits and basically rode that wave for about twenty years. But I think all that cache is played out by now.

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (3113) 2 days ago

Oh my goodness... "a long, bean-like head" 😂🤣🤣

I think he's adorable and has earned the right to be called great. He's played many different roles and does it very well 😊

[–] flickdude (17) 2 days ago

He has always been a C list actor to me, starting with bosom buddies sitcom... and that movie with him on the island I tried to watch, it was supposed to be great - but it was so so horrible I was left wondering how the hell most people think that was good. only thing he ever did that could be considered good was Philadelphia, everything else is joke level crap.

[–] Destinata (3315) 2 days ago

You're right. Except that he had a way of projecting a kind of charm -- which in the movie biz is sometimes all it takes.

What he lacks is gravitas. I was thinking of the difference between Denzel and Hanks in Philadelphia. Denzel wasn't given as much to do, he didn't get to show his range, but he had the gravitas. Even playing someone who was dying of a horrible disease, Hanks still seemed too light. They picked him for the role because he had that boy-next-door quality, and was likable, not because he could reach through a screen and rip your heart out.

People liked to compare him to Spencer Tracy. Tracy had gravitas. He was in demand into his old age because he could command a screen. Once Hanks started losing his boyish looks, folks could find what he offered elsewhere, with a face to match. Hanks should be getting meaty, character-driven roles at this point in his career. Of course, they're not writing things like Judgment at Nuremberg anymore. But if they were, Hanks hasn't the chops to play them.

[–] RoboReCop (3294) 2 days ago

Shoes. He likes shoes.