MovieChat Forums > Under Suspicion (2000) Discussion > best and worst perfomers

best and worst perfomers

posted 18 years ago by Gibski
7 replies | jump to latest

morgan freeman is very very very very good in Under Suspicion...i think he gives the best performance....and surprised me......there is a lot of subtley in his acting....and a lot that you simply don't notice...cos his for one thing his "look" in the movie is so simple...what he's wearing...his simple hair....everything...he also makes a conscious effort not to steal the screen..cos that's not his job in the movie...there are so many things he does which just showcase what a true and pure actor the guy really is

and the worst performance has to go to...gene hackman's toupee! haha

[–] Not_just_a_fan 18 years ago

It's true Morgan Freeman is a fantastic actor.
He's great in larger than life roles too,like in deep impact and Bruce allmighty.
He never fails to impress.

[–] CmdrCody 18 years ago

The hairpiece is a yardstick for Hearst's life. In the beginning of the movie, it's important to him. As "the onion is peeled away" as Hearst puts it, the hairpiece is ripped off and then discarded. The fight in the stairwell with Sgt. "Opie" is Hearst's realization that his personal secrets and his outward appearance are about to be shed...in front of everybody.

CmdrCody

[–] Kinematico 17 years ago

Morgan and Freeman were great as always.

But not even two great talents combined can save a crappy scripted, directed movie like this one.

[–] CmdrCody 17 years ago

Equinoccio: Too bad you didn't like the picture.

Of course, the Producers of the movie, Gene Hackman and MORGAN FREEMAN, thought it turned out just fine.

[–] Gibski 17 years ago

and just as importantly....cmdr and i think it turned out just fine too :) hehe

[–] profoundkeys123 17 years ago

I really liked the film and thought Freeman and Hackman were great, despite not being massive fans of theres before.

I thought Thomas Jane's character Detective Owen was one of the worst scripted characters I've ever seen. Bad cop cliche after cliche, the film would have been much better without Jane. To be honest I cant tell if its a bad performance by Jane or just bad script as I can't think what else I've seen him in, but the script did him no favours so i'll give him the benefit of the doubt!

[–] CmdrCody 17 years ago

profound: You forget, sir...the character, Detective Owen, played by Tom Jane, was specifically inserted by the Executive Producers, Morgan Freeman and Gene Hackman. They wanted him to play the proverbial "bad cop."

Owen is aggressive from the start and only gets worse as Hearst slowly sinks. He's Hearst's competition for Chantal...didn't you see how he started hovering around her, getting closer into her "space"...trying to get in that "closed door" that was bolted shut to Hearst ?

He's the young stud. Hearst is the old fox. Who prevails in this side struggle to the main issue ?

This matchup is precisely what Freeman and Hackman, as producers and actors, wanted on the screen. Jane is the actor they picked and the script is theirs, too...word for word. The movie is their labor of love, their "baby," and they think it came out perfectly. It's a movie that THEY wanted to make...their way...with their script...their co-stars.

I think it's a masterpiece, covering many subjects, in a subtle way. I like the surprise ending which turns the movie inside out. Tom Jane's contribution is essential to the picture, despite your criticism.

CmdrCody