Mark Walhberg has gotta be one of the worst actors I've ever seen.
Granted, he is no Meryl Streep. He has surprised me by being intelligent enough to make smart choices that take into account the limits to his acting range. George Clooney is said to understand that he too has a limited acting range. This isn't career limiting if you have enough juice to produce your own films, and make sure you cast yourself in roles suited for your range.
Ever notice how whenever hes angry it sounds more like 'Wah Wah wah' like hes crying. Also, why is it when he gets mad, his angry face looks like his normal face. Its like hes only capable of making type of face no.matter what.
Sorry, it sounds like you may be complaining he isn't measuring up to the current fad of how a movie tough guy should act.
Yeah. Fad. Consider young Kirk Douglas or young Burt Lancaster. Go watch a film from the period when they were young hot stars. Those guys were horrible scenery chewers. We would regard them as horrible over-actors, if they were giving performances like that today. But their fans thought they were great actors.
Why? Because there are fads in acting styles.
They acted together, when they were senior citizens, and they adapted and left that scenery-chewing in the past.
There is a scene in Three Kings when Wahlberg's character is locked in a storage room, and finds some boxes full of stolen cell phones. When he can't get through to his local HQ, he phones his wife back in the USA. He tries to get her to take his situation seriously enough that she immediately does her best to contact his HQ for him, without fully conveying his situation's seriousness, so she doesn't panic and freak out. It is a terrific scene.
So, no offense, I can't take your complaints seriously.
He may not be Meryl Streep, but he may actually be a better actor than Clooney.
reply
share